Except some attendees, might be acting as the proxy of several members, such as members of their club or region, and possibly on a discretionary basis too.greywolf wrote:Spookster wrote:Yes, but it's the time taken for the 50-60 people in the room to make their votes, and then for these to be counted and added to the (pre-counted) proxies that takes the additional time.
You'd only need to count them if the number in the room was greater than the margin of the proxy votes
AGM summary
Moderators: [nope] cartel, team nopesport
27 posts
• Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2
Re: AGM summary
- maprun
- diehard
- Posts: 685
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 10:37 am
Re: AGM summary
spitalfields wrote:I'm absolutely livid that I've been disenfranchised by a technicality that [...] flies in the face of any common sense understanding of how this [...] works with every other organisation for which I've ever submitted a proxy vote.
I would be surprised if that is true - it's standard practice at company AGMs. See, for example, the AGM minutes of the National Trust, where every motion is put to a show of hands at the meeting first, and then only taken to a poll, and the proxies counted, if the show of hands is not decisive.
That said, the Board be reviewing the AGM at next month's meeting (as we do every year), and I expect this will include discussion of whether/when the Board itself should choose to put motions to a poll.
British Orienteering Director | Opinions expressed on here are entirely my own, and do not represent the views of British Orienteering.
"If only you were younger and better..."
"If only you were younger and better..."
-
Scott - god
- Posts: 2384
- Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 4:43 am
- Location: in the queue for the ice-cream van
Re: AGM summary
I think BO’s email was totally disingenuous for not giving an opportunity to call for a poll with the voting/appointment of proxy system. Why state that every member’s vote is important and thanking people for taking the time to vote when no opportunity was given or the article process explained to actually make those votes count.
I would also suggest that the chair of the meeting, if holding a number of proxies in a potentially contentious issue should seek to ensure that those members’ votes are actually counted by calling for a poll.
I would also suggest that the chair of the meeting, if holding a number of proxies in a potentially contentious issue should seek to ensure that those members’ votes are actually counted by calling for a poll.
What are pictorial descriptions?
- Electrocuted
- red
- Posts: 190
- Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 1:49 pm
- Location: Glasgow
Re: AGM summary
Scott wrote:spitalfields wrote:I'm absolutely livid that I've been disenfranchised by a technicality that [...] flies in the face of any common sense understanding of how this [...] works with every other organisation for which I've ever submitted a proxy vote.
I would be surprised if that is true - it's standard practice at company AGMs. See, for example, the AGM minutes of the National Trust, where every motion is put to a show of hands at the meeting first, and then only taken to a poll, and the proxies counted, if the show of hands is not decisive.
That said, the Board be reviewing the AGM at next month's meeting (as we do every year), and I expect this will include discussion of whether/when the Board itself should choose to put motions to a poll.
I hope so Scott, and also they should reflect on why money was spent on an electronic voting process, which was then ignored and has potentially disenfranchised the membership.
- Drdr
- off string
- Posts: 37
- Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 2:25 pm
Re: AGM summary
Scott wrote:spitalfields wrote:I'm absolutely livid that I've been disenfranchised by a technicality that [...] flies in the face of any common sense understanding of how this [...] works with every other organisation for which I've ever submitted a proxy vote.
I would be surprised if that is true - it's standard practice at company AGMs. See, for example, the AGM minutes of the National Trust, where every motion is put to a show of hands at the meeting first, and then only taken to a poll, and the proxies counted, if the show of hands is not decisive.
Perhaps I am wrong, and have been duped by other organisations in a similar way. However, at least some publish vote results with a breakdown of voting method, so what you describe might not be uncommon but is not universal. Regardless, it makes a mockery of asking people to vote in advance.
- spitalfields
- orange
- Posts: 132
- Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2018 1:54 pm
Re: AGM summary
In the absence of any evidence to the contrary we should perhaps give the meeting chair some credit. He/she would have known the balance of the proxies they were holding on any issue. If this was significantly opposite to a show of hands in the meeting, then I think they would have been obliged to call for a poll. (This is certainly how it has worked on occasions in the past).
My interpretation is thus that the absence of a poll means the proxy votes cast would have only confirmed the show of hands, so it would have been a waste of time to call for one. So contrary to some suggestions above every electronic vote counted.
My interpretation is thus that the absence of a poll means the proxy votes cast would have only confirmed the show of hands, so it would have been a waste of time to call for one. So contrary to some suggestions above every electronic vote counted.
- Snail
- diehard
- Posts: 709
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 8:37 pm
Re: AGM summary
If the chair had said “online voting showed 50 votes for and 50 against so we”ll add a show of hands of anyone here who hasn’t already voted to the result” I would be happy with this method. I will be looking at the minutes to see what they say about this
- Frog1
- string
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2019 10:08 pm
Re: AGM summary
Electrocuted wrote:I would also suggest that the chair of the meeting, if holding a number of proxies in a potentially contentious issue should seek to ensure that those members’ votes are actually counted by calling for a poll.
But that is exactly what did happen!
Martin Ward, SYO (Chair) & SPOOK.
I'm a 1%er. Are you?
I'm a 1%er. Are you?
-
Spookster - god
- Posts: 2267
- Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 1:49 pm
- Location: Sheffield
Re: AGM summary
What is the official way of formally informing the electorate of the results of the votes?
Hopefully the report will be annotated with a bit of "context" for the times when a show of hands was called for rather than looking at the online voting. This would make it nice and clear to all why it was done that way.
Note, I don't think anyone is concerned that someone is trying to rig the votes, but it is the "why bother asking me to vote and then ignore it" aspect which seems a bit strange to some of us.
BTW I'd have thought that had > 3 members expressed their wishes in voting on a topic (as opposed to a "none of the above" or "I'll leave it to a proxy") then that is them also expressing their wish to have their vote considered rather than relying on a show of hands.
Hopefully the report will be annotated with a bit of "context" for the times when a show of hands was called for rather than looking at the online voting. This would make it nice and clear to all why it was done that way.
Note, I don't think anyone is concerned that someone is trying to rig the votes, but it is the "why bother asking me to vote and then ignore it" aspect which seems a bit strange to some of us.
BTW I'd have thought that had > 3 members expressed their wishes in voting on a topic (as opposed to a "none of the above" or "I'll leave it to a proxy") then that is them also expressing their wish to have their vote considered rather than relying on a show of hands.
JK
- JK
- diehard
- Posts: 748
- Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 5:22 pm
- Location: Warrington :-(
Re: AGM summary
Good to see the full details of the AGM proxy votes and poll have been posted on the BO website under news.
- maprun
- diehard
- Posts: 685
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 10:37 am
Re: AGM summary
maprun wrote:Good to see the full details of the AGM proxy votes and poll have been posted on the BO website under news.
Indeed it is. And I have to put my hands up and admit I over-reacted to Scott's summary due to misunderstanding the process. Apologies Scott- I realise you were only trying to spread the word about stuff that people should be interested in (whether or not they are), and I realise that reactions like mine make these things feel like thankless tasks.
The item in question is a sore point for me, as I think hiking membership fees without introducing any 'new member' discount is a huge mistake. But that's not the point here. Democracy has been upheld. Even if the democratic will of the people is something that will ultimately lead to their own demise.
- spitalfields
- orange
- Posts: 132
- Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2018 1:54 pm
Re: AGM summary
maprun wrote:Good to see the full details of the AGM proxy votes and poll have been posted on the BO website under news.
Nice to see everything detailed and well explained - unlike the previous documentation which was too easy to take out of context.
And well done on getting such detailed results out so promptly after the event ... maybe whoever is responsible will be throwing their hat in for the overall JK Results service next year.
JK [i.e. "Just Kidding" for the last one!]
JK
- JK
- diehard
- Posts: 748
- Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 5:22 pm
- Location: Warrington :-(
27 posts
• Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 40 guests