A point I haven't seen addressed: If independent vote hadn't been split, Matt would have had the highest "direct" vote total and second highest overall total. Any way we can get independent owners to leave the field open to Matt for next election? The extra 13K votes would have made all the difference.
Many owners do not understand that they can cast all of their (3 votes in 2013, 2 votes in 2014) for a single candidate.
I think this is because there is a tendency to think in terms of state or federal elections where (to my knowledge) it is not possible to vote more than once for the same candidate. WorldMark's is a corporate election process with little similarity to a state or federal election. In the California corporate (WorldMark's) election process, you can change your proxy holder and/or redirect your proxy holder on how to vote right up to close of the ballot box on election day. This is because no votes are cast except at the annual meeting...which is another point many folks do not understand.
WorldMark has no primary election process. So if you have 6 or 8 candidates running for 2 or 3 positions, votes will be scattered around like a shotgun blast. This year, there were only two, non-Wyndham supported candidates which helped in that regard.
Also, many owners do not understand the benefit gained by assigning their proxy to WM Owners, Inc. without voting. By not voting, WM Owners, Inc. can cast those votes as a block for a single candidate. If an owner assigns their proxy to a proxy holder and directs the proxy holder to vote 1 vote for candidate "A" and one vote candidate "B", they are directing the proxy holder how to vote, and are "diluting their vote; i.e. the vote for candidate "B" is basically a vote lost from Candidate "A".
WM Owners, Inc. does try to get this information out to owners. Owners like you can help.