27-08-2013, 08:28 PM
Suggested Solution to the Proxy Vote Issue.
Divide the CS membership into equally populated geographical based constituencies. Each constituency will elect a representative to attend CS Council and AGM meetings on their behalf. Once the Council/ AGM agenda is posted (in good time to allow the collection of constituency opinion) the representative will hold a local meeting or email correspondence to discuss the agenda and note their collective viewpoint of all agenda items. The representative then attends the CS meetings and votes according to the wishes of their constituency. If amendments are made during the course of the Council/AGM meeting then the representative will vote as they believe their constituents would wish. Details of how each representative exercised their votes will be published in the minutes of each meeting. If any constituency are unhappy about any votes cast on their behalf then they may change their representatives vote if they can muster a majority petition among their entire constituency population and submit that challenge within a predetermined period of time. Once sufficient time has passed to absorb all constituency challenges the minutes will be set.
The voting power of each constituency should be calibrated so that they do not dominate the AGM. i.e if we had nine constituencies then each representative would hold 10% of the vote with the AGM attendees also holding 10%. e.g. if those attending the AGM who are not a representative, vote on the floor for a particular election or motion then their vote would count as 10% of the overall vote.
Most chess clubs hold annual meetings to appoint office bearers and carry out general admin. It should be relatively simple to incorporate this alternative to the proxy vote by adding CS agenda items to the discussion and appointing a constituency representative.
If a constituency is unable to appoint a representative to attend a CS meeting then a proxy vote may still be submitted. This would still differ from the present proxy method as the proxy would be for one defined constituency.
As you can probably tell I have plagiarised the voting framework from the renowned democratic leaders in this field- China, North Korea and the Eurovision song contest.
Divide the CS membership into equally populated geographical based constituencies. Each constituency will elect a representative to attend CS Council and AGM meetings on their behalf. Once the Council/ AGM agenda is posted (in good time to allow the collection of constituency opinion) the representative will hold a local meeting or email correspondence to discuss the agenda and note their collective viewpoint of all agenda items. The representative then attends the CS meetings and votes according to the wishes of their constituency. If amendments are made during the course of the Council/AGM meeting then the representative will vote as they believe their constituents would wish. Details of how each representative exercised their votes will be published in the minutes of each meeting. If any constituency are unhappy about any votes cast on their behalf then they may change their representatives vote if they can muster a majority petition among their entire constituency population and submit that challenge within a predetermined period of time. Once sufficient time has passed to absorb all constituency challenges the minutes will be set.
The voting power of each constituency should be calibrated so that they do not dominate the AGM. i.e if we had nine constituencies then each representative would hold 10% of the vote with the AGM attendees also holding 10%. e.g. if those attending the AGM who are not a representative, vote on the floor for a particular election or motion then their vote would count as 10% of the overall vote.
Most chess clubs hold annual meetings to appoint office bearers and carry out general admin. It should be relatively simple to incorporate this alternative to the proxy vote by adding CS agenda items to the discussion and appointing a constituency representative.
If a constituency is unable to appoint a representative to attend a CS meeting then a proxy vote may still be submitted. This would still differ from the present proxy method as the proxy would be for one defined constituency.
As you can probably tell I have plagiarised the voting framework from the renowned democratic leaders in this field- China, North Korea and the Eurovision song contest.