What's wrong with voting by mail?

There are several problems: it's insecure, it's expensive, it's cumbersome, it denies the right to participate fully in the Society's affairs to some folks, and it's far too easy to distort the results.

In any secret mail ballot, steps must be taken to see that only those entitled to vote actually do so, that each person only casts one vote, and that there is no link between the person voting and the vote itself. If the balloting method used isn't carefully designed, it's easy to have problems and abuses.

The balloting method used in the pending amendment, at least, does not suffer from those problems. That's because they lifted it, almost word for word, from Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (pages 409-411 in the 10th edition). The problem here is that the cost of running a mail ballot in this way is enormous. Each envelope must contain two return envelopes, the ballot itself, plus any other campaign materials to be included. This is certainly enough to weigh over an ounce, and quite possibly two or three. Multiply even the cost of a two-ounce mailing (60 cents per piece, at current USPS rates) by 800 members, and that's nearly $500 on postage alone - and that does not include the cost of printing all of that, nor the cost of stationery, nor of stuffing envelopes, nor the CPA firm that the amendment would mandate. $1000 per ballot is not at all an unreasonable estimate. With three ballots, potentially, per year, this would burn through the Society's funds in a hurry.

The mail balloting process takes a lot of time and effort to execute. Mail transit times are measured in days; the notice required in the amendment is nearly a month; and then there's the time required for the CPA firm to do their job. For an election with results due by the first weekend in August, nominations must begin in April. Then there's the minor matter of stuffing 800 envelopes, or paying someone else to do it.

The fundamental basis for decision in organizations such as the Society is a full discussion of the issues in a way that everyone can hear and participate, and then cast an informed vote. Voting by mail denies the benefit of that discussion to those who are not present at the meeting, and so they cast votes without the benefit of the opinions of others - and an uninformed vote is often worse than no vote at all.

One major reason that an uninformed vote is worse is that those who aren't informed are unduly influenced by campaigning. The closest parallel to the Society is the balloting for the elected ARRL positions in Texas. It doesn't take much study to see that it's nearly impossible to be elected Director of the League's West Gulf Division without obtaining the blessing of the Dallas Amateur Radio Club. The same goes for the Section Manager for North Texas. Electing directors of the Society by mail would have the same effect - and that would turn the Society, effectively, into a wholly-owned subsidiary of the DARC. It's the Texas VHF-FM Society, and as such is supposed to represent all of Texas, not just the DFW Metroplex.

Voting by mail is a bad idea. It produces bad results at great cost. It should be rejected by the membership.