Ringing Forums

You theoretically could but there are probably better systems to enable votes on multiple topics to be anonymous even though each person should only be allowed to vote once on each topic.
With the MemberMojo store the administrator would see who ‘bought’ each vote so you would have to trust this person to keep it confidential.

A Google form could be sent out using MemberMojo to email only members and can stop the same email address being used twice and is easy for most people to use on phone or computer web browsers with anonymous results but I don’t know whether it can stop people forwarding the link to an alternative email address to gain more voters.

There is much to be said for people being present to hear the debate before deciding how to vote.

On-line voting is not a solution to member engagement; perhaps even quite the opposite.

I agree 100% with . We have local experience of this and I would not recommend it.

Engagement is about more than voting. As others have said, if the ability to vote is divorced from engaging with the debate it can undermine the process.
Detached voting works for things like elections, where there’s not normally debate, and can be better if accompanied by position statements.
Where there is debate the logical way to increase engagement would be a hybrid meeting. Where travel is an issue, which it can be for larger societies, then it could increase engagement. But if engagement is already weak it could decrease in person attendance, with people taking the easy option.
It might be better to start by asking why member engagement is low in the first place.

To improve engagement you really need to step back and consider how your organisation is structured and what it is there to do. In my experience ringing organisations tend to be run along the top-down model, rather than designed to serve from the bottom up. Votes are important in the top-down model, but far less important in the bottom-up model. People will become engaged when things that matter to them are discussed, and they are consulted in a way where each person’s voice is valued. There are lots of ways to do this.

My own District is probably typical of many. We have an ageing population of tower captains who do everything in their towers, and who have been in post for decades. They are not grooming their successors, and no-one dares to disagree or stand against them. Consequently, when they are no longer able to ring, the band collapses, resulting in little or no regular ringing. Since before Covid this has happened with four local bands covering six of the thirty-three towers in our District. I can see a similar number of others on the danger list. In the space of around ten years about a third of our towers could have gone silent.

Fortunately, we have an enthusiastic group of new ringers who have learnt since Covid. We have run a lot of regular training sessions, and they have got to know each other very well. However, there is a disconnect with many of the long-term ringers in the District. Whilst several decades ago the older ones would have come and participated in the ringing before the District meeting, and afterwards, and even gone down the pub once ringing had finished, they now just turn up for the tea, cake and chat, and go home immediately afterwards. The newer ringers do not benefit from ringing with a strong band, and rather than being engaged, are turned off by the ritual of electing new members, minutes, badges, certificates, annual reports and raising money for the BRF etc.

The new ringers are engaged as active members of our SPOND App which we use to book training sessions. There is also a vibrant What’sApp group where they share experiences and photos etc. The new ringers are keen to progress, and our training sessions are often over-subscribed. The attendance on our Improvers group outings is better than the typical quarterly District meeting, although with a substantially different clientele.

The new ringers have ambitious plans to establish a training centre, similar to those in Norwich and Cambridge. We’ve consulted all towers by conducting a baseline survey of the state of ringing in our District, and conducted a well-attended consultation evening, where there was constructive discussion and everyone put their suggestions down on post-it notes. This project is being driven from the bottom up, where there is a lot of enthusiasm, and expertise brought in from other walks of life. However, my worry is the disconnect, and that votes at a District meeting would not produce the same results.

The abuse of anonymous online voting by an officer who is the sole holder of the member database for an association to which I belong, and who has no experience of ringing custom & practice and protocol, has caused serious acrimony within both the committee and the rank-and-file membership, to an extent that disbandment of that association is now a serious consideration.
As stated by Simon Meyer, online voting is not the way ahead.

“We’ve consulted all towers by conducting a baseline survey of the state of ringing in our District, and conducted a well-attended consultation evening, where there was constructive discussion and everyone put their suggestions down on post-it notes.”

I think this specific kind of consultation has a better chance of engagement than the general meeting which often has a running order of going through the motions and little to be discussed.
I agree that you have more chance of engaging members if you can provide information about what you want to discuss, the issue to be addressed, and then people will come to talk about it.

Lynne and Barry from St Clements Cambridge came to talk to the Essex Course a couple of weeks ago and I think that was a really good way to get enthusiastic ringers, new or more experienced, talking about how a ringing centre could help to develop ringers all year round.

I think this specific kind of consultation has a better chance of engagement than the general meeting which often has a running order of going through the motions and little to be discussed. — Lucy Chandhial

I agree. Sticking to the general running order is probably one of the main reasons why there is a lack of engagement by members and why many ringing organisations are finding difficulties filling vacant positions. Whilst it’s a source of comfort for some to have the consistency of doing the same thing decade after decade, it’s not going to set others alight.

We’ve been running three-day ringing courses for the last 50+ years, but what Lynn and Barry are doing in Cambridge, and what others are doing elsewhere, is a source of inspiration. One of our newer ringers attended two three-day courses last year and was concerned about the lack of 'rope time' they received. Two or three touches for their benefit each morning and afternoon did not result in them mastering what they came to learn.

Three-day courses teaching around 60 students at a time are not going to make a significant impact on delivering 10,000 new ringers over the next few years. Regular weekly sessions at a local level like those at St Clements are far easier to organise, less expensive to attend, and could engage a lot of new people But that is not what we always do, so is less likely to be considered at the typical general meeting.