AGM Election Results

[Hugh Brechin]

I like the principles behind e-voting, but there are a couple of issues. Motions are quite frequently amended after discussion, and part of the point of an AGM is for people to talk about options, listen to each other's points and reach a conclusion. It's not simply a day for votes to be counted.

To take one example (and this doesn't really answer Andrew McHarg's point, but does at least illustrate one difference), David's decision to change his vote and the disposal of his proxies based on the events of the day when the same candidacy recurred, is I believe entirely legitimate, but it's difficult to see how that sort of responsiveness to developments could be built in to an e-voting system.

[Andy Howie]

Would e-voting not mean that most people would cast their votes prior and not attend the AGM hence AGM is pointless as decision has been made already?

Just being the Devils Advocate here!

Not sure how e-voting is any different to the current proxy system with regard to whether people will attend or not? It would just improve the chances of people getting a chance to vote, and subsequently make for fairer elections imo.

Ok,

There is a motion. That motions is amended at the AGM, that would mean all the online votes become nul and void!

It is not as simple as online forms and email voting unfortunately. I did raise a thread on this some while back and even then we as a collective could not find a satisfactory solution.

One thing we all agree on is the status quo is not good and has to change but the change has to be for the better not the worse so we have to be very careful about what we change it to.

We could take the ECF model where normal members don't get a vote... I think not!!!

[Andy Howie]

Hugh,

The only way would be to have the AGM broadcast and people voting live!

Now there is a technical challenge I like the sound of

[Ianbrownlee]

Would e-voting not mean that most people would cast their votes prior and not attend the AGM hence AGM is pointless as decision has been made already?

Just being the Devils Advocate here!

Who asked you Andy Howie (only joking or course) No but it would have all the advantages of proxy voting with none of the disadvantages. I sure it was the overriding consensus of the AGM that proxy voting had many flaws but the one service it did provide was a voice for people who could not attend especially the people up north. A voting form would eliminate the subjectivity incurred when one asks another for their vote. A voting form can be cold but it objective and clear. Remember the AGM is also there for accountability and transparency. A lot of people didn't turnup at the AGM not because their couldn't be there, it was because they couldn't be bothered. At least a voting form would encourage participation WITH VERY LITTLE EFFORT i.e click a button or type in a few details.

[Andy Howie]

Would e-voting not mean that most people would cast their votes prior and not attend the AGM hence AGM is pointless as decision has been made already?

Just being the Devils Advocate here!

Who asked you Andy Howie (only joking or course) No but it would have all the advantages of proxy voting with none of the disadvantages. I sure it was the overriding consensus of the AGM that proxy voting had many flaws but the one service it did provide was a voice for people who could not attend especially the people up north. A voting form would eliminate the subjectivity incurred when one asks another for their vote. A voting form can be cold but it objective and clear. Remember the AGM is also there for accountability and transparency. A lot of people didn't turnup at the AGM not because their couldn't be there, it was because they couldn't be bothered. At least a voting form would encourage participation WITH VERY LITTLE EFFORT i.e click a button or type in a few details.

Ian, still does not solve the problem of amendments

[JMcNicoll]

The RSPB and the National trust for Scotland seem to manage with ways to record your vote for the respective AGMs of those organisations, in my experience, with an online form readily available well before the AGM. Though perhaps the business allowed at the AGMs of those organisations is more restrictive than ours.

[Andy Howie]

I wish we had not started this I am sitting on the bus home working out how we can broadcast the agm so people can interact from home. SEE WHAT YOU STARTED!

[Ianbrownlee]

Would e-voting not mean that most people would cast their votes prior and not attend the AGM hence AGM is pointless as decision has been made already?

Ian, still does not solve the problem of amendments

Andy I don't know all the answers and hopefully more people will contribute perhaps a live feed to the AGM would help to the chess Scotland website or other means but I honestly think the proxy vote has had its day certainly in its present format. Proxy voting works when a small proportion use it but when it accounts for a large percentage unchecked then in the future it could be subject to misuse. I don't blame anyone at all for its use in present and past occasions but we must address this and if anything came out of the meeting it was a consensus for change. In my opinion a live voting feed and/or even better a live blog with public access can be the way out. The blog can be made to pass comment to a meeting(subject to registration and control) and the voting feed for votes. If this is uncomfortable than the blog can be one- way i.e posting from the meeting, not to the meeting

[Ianbrownlee]

I wish we had not started this I am sitting on the bus home working out how we can broadcast the agm so people can interact from home. SEE WHAT YOU STARTED!

whoaaaaahahahah gotcha

[WBuchanan]

Would e-voting not mean that most people would cast their votes prior and not attend the AGM hence AGM is pointless as decision has been made already?

Just being the Devils Advocate here!

Andy you’re hopeless as Devils Advocate! Stand aside…

Separate the idea of deciding motions and candidates at the same time. Candidates can’t be ‘amended’ (though the new Andy M might disagree) therefore this voting could take place outwith AGM.
At the very least, don’t have meeting discussions about unopposed candidates.
No coup d’etats - if you want rid of someone you must table a specific motion and let them defend themselves fairly.

This immediately frees up a lot of time to make the discussion meaningful to a wider group of people.

Attending the AGM

Canvass the whole membership if you need to, find out why they don’t come.

Example - some quick thoughts why people might not attend an AGM

*The feeling that discussion is over their heads, or officials talking to each other (as somebody did day)

*Information on which even to base questions isn’t available

*No meaningful discussion of budget, hence prioritization determined by “we’ve got to pay for this or that previous commitment we didn’t discuss with you either” (hence the feeling “so what am I doing here”). Sorry if that’s unfair.

*Get an independent chair (someone like that Donald Wilson perhaps that’s will have done it before and isn’t the one being questioned or criticized) hopefully ending rancorous aftermaths but also giving a fair crack to questions, rather than foboff answer then moving on. Remember, we’ll have saved some time so suitable discussion time is possible.

*Include members more enthusiastically in decision-making – starting with information and end to secrecy except when issue genuinely too sensitive. Put cards on table, not up jumper…

The catch is, the members might occasionally recommend different priorities to the execs. Have more faith in us plebs That’s the devilish bit!

Cheers everybody