Great Theory – but impacticable to operate.
Any form of proxy voting requires two essentials, namely;
1) A fixed proposition.
2) A wholly democratic and universal medium.
Let me explain. If there is a fixed proposition, a proxy vote is fine, but any deviation due to any form of ammendment to the proposition at the A.G.M cannot be responded to by a proxy vote.
An example is – should we vote for Jones, Smith or Green for Chairman? Such a proposition could be responded to by a proxy vote.
However if the proposition was (say) that “Yowl” should have a green cover, but by deliberation at the A.G.M it was altered to a green cover with a gold border, then the proxy votes are nul and void. Silly example, but I hope you get the drift.
Proxy voting also has two other drawbacks. First it is slow and laborious, and secondly, the amount of response you would get from the overall membership would probably be very small.
The main objection to proxy voting however is that it is open to pressurised canvasing – i.e. someone phoning around to get support by ilicit claims.
Any form of proxy voting would have to be in “Yowl”, not on the website, which currently does not attract more than about 10% of the membership.
Overall, I think we should stay with the maxim of “Those who are sufficiently interested in the Club are those who attend the A.G.M. – so let them decide it’s well being.