This is a weird one, alright and I’m not sure if it stands up to much scrutiny. For a start, an individual owner can’t legitimately present themselves as expressing the views of all owners – they can say they do but they’d have to back it up at some point.
You can’t even issue edicts telling people not to tell lies. You can tell lies if you want – you just have to be prepared to face the consequences – defamation actions, fraud investigations, eternal damnation – if you do.
It sounds like a ‘gagging” motion which, firstly the chairmen shouldn’t even allow as it is incompetent in so many ways, not least that it is unenforceable.
If this is a clumsy attempt to get the majority of owners to express the view that they don’t agree with other owners, then that’s what it should say. But the ruling group has to be very careful when they start using proxies (as I’m sure they will) to control debate and restrict the flow of information.
A quiet word with your strata manager should see this knocked off the agenda.
But if I were in your shoes, I would think your opponents had just kicked a massive own goal, firstly by displaying their basic lack of understanding of strata law and secondly by inviting the question “what is it that you don’t want us to hear.”