It is possible to appoint two or more persons to act as agents, for example by using the language which, for example, “A, B, C, D and E, F, or one of them, lawyers and agents for me, irrevocably, with the agreement of a majority of these lawyers and agents, to appoint a replacement or substitute for and in my place.”  The possibility of increased use of proxy voting has been the subject of much speculation. Terry F. Buss et al. write that Internet voting would de facto lead to proxy voting approval, as passwords could be shared with others: “It is obvious that the cost-benefit calculations associated with the act of voting could also change significantly, as organizations attempt to identify and provide incentives to control proxy votes without violating the bans on vote buying in the law.”  It is only used in public limited companies where control is in the majority of shares, and not in the majority of shareholders. If a person takes control of fifty-one percent of the shares, he can control the company and choose the directors he likes, despite the hundreds or thousands of holders of the remaining shares. Laws relating to public limited companies are almost always based on the theory that the purpose of the organization is to earn money by carrying out a particular activity, using capital provided by a large number of persons whose control over the activity should be proportional to the capital they have invested in the enterprise. The people who provide most of the capital should control the organization, but they can still live in different parts of the country or travel at the time of the annual meeting. The proxy voting system allows them to control the choice of directors without attending meetings. Traditionally, dealer brokers are allowed to vote for “routine” proposals on behalf of their shareholders if shareholders do not return the proxy statement. This has been the subject of controversy, and in 2006, the NYSE Proxy Working Group recommended changing the rules, for example. B rule 452, so that elections of undisputed directors are not considered routine.  The broker`s vote is largely subject to Section 452 :2The SEC approved the rule on July 1, 2009.  In 2005, a pilot study in Pakistan, Structural Deep Democracy, SD2 was used to select the leaders of a sustainable agricultural group called Contact Youth.
SD2 uses PageRank for the processing of transitive proxy votes, with the additional restrictions of imposing at least two initial proxies per voter, and all voters are proxy candidates. More complex variants can rely on sd2, for example. B the addition of specialized proxies and direct votes for some topics, but SD2 as the underlying roof system requires that generalist proxies are still used. The proxy is defined by the supreme courts as “an authority or power to do a particular thing.”  A man may delegate to his suppletive any power he possesses himself. It may also give secret instructions to vote on certain matters.  However, a proxy is ineffective if it is contrary to law or order.  If the agent is duly appointed and acts within the agent`s framework, the person authorizing the agent is bound by the actions of his or her agent, including his or her errors or errors.  When the representative sends his representative to a meeting, the voting representative may do whatever is necessary to fully and fully exercise the representative`s right to vote at that meeting.
. . .