"A simple majority vote is sufficient to enact changes for any issue brought up for vote." (Press #367) "Simple majority" means 50%+1. This may result in the need for runoff votes or other strategies, depending on how ballots are written.

Votes of "no preference" count toward this Minimum Voter Turnout. (Press #415)

The linkies in question lead me to believe that not getting 50% +1 means taking no action, and is equivalent to a No vote (if the question was formulated in a yes/no format). Other interpretations?

Apparently we voted on this.. Nilly "Sunnydale Press" Mar 9, 2003 1:04:42 am PST

Option 1: An option which receives more than 50% of the vote wins: 57 votes (57%).

Option 2: Whichever option has the most votes wins: 43 votes (43 %).

Which doesn't actually make it clear. And since it is way past my sleepy time I hope y'all figure it out while I dream.

I am kind of chagrined that I haven't realized that before. But if the MVT is 42, yet only 15 votes can carry the day, that seems off to me. I'd say it should be 50% +1 of all votes, too. I don't know from voting theory or whatever, so I'm open to hearing why or why not that's... I hesitate to use this word... fair.

ETA: I'll go back and read the links provided above, too.

This actually bugs me enough that I may propose that we stop allowing or having no preference. Or at least make it 50% +1 of ALL votes, not just the votes with content.

The whole point of a No Preference vote is that it counts towards the quorum of 42 without affecting the outcome. It's a way of saying, "I don't personally care which way the vote goes, but I trust other buffistas to make the right decision." If we say that a proposal needs 50%+1 of ALL votes, then a No Preference vote effectively becomes a No vote.

I'm willing to consense on this issue (HP7 spoiling in the Zombie Book Club Thread, no whitefont, till 4 weeks after hardcover release in the US), but once we've done so, I advocate that somebody do a linky announce what we've consensed in the Annoucements thread.

I'm totally consensing with Nutty and everybody else.

Regarding the "no preference" vote - despite wishing I didn't have to, I actually find myself using it more and more lately, as the topics for votes are such that I have no opinion on, whatsoever (mostly tv threads of shows I anyway can't watch, so discussions that anyway can't include me, no matter what the result of the vote may end up being). I mostly vote in order to play the part I can, in making sure there's the needed number of votes in the ballot. But I feel like it's not fair of me to vote either way when I don't really understand the issues discussed.

But it's definitely not a rule (for example, the vote that Laura linked to, earlier, had only two options, and no "no preference" one).

Also, Jon just said what I wanted to say about the 50% thing. As we decided it, it's 50% of the opinions that should go this way or the other, not of the total number of people who showed up.

I'm with Jon and Nilly on this one.

If we say that a proposal needs 50%+1 of ALL votes, then a No Preference vote effectively becomes a No vote.

Jesus, we'll be like the Senate.

Seriously, though, one of the things that makes ballot crafting complicated some times is the effort to have everything as close to straight yes/no as possible. Since we don't have any kind of preferential voting or run-off procedure, having three options that count that way would mean a lot of things end up in plurality no-mans-land.

I think the issue is one of education. So long as people voting No Preference understand the impact of their vote (e.g., a vote of Yes-6, No-5, NP-31 would pass), I think we should let them vote that way. As I wrote above, the NP voter is essentially saying (using the same example), "I trust those 11 people to do what is best." If you disagree with that, then don't vote at all. But to not allow that option is disenfranchising.

I agree with Jon about the education. Those of us who were around for all the hashing out of voting probably remember what "no preference" means-- that is, counting toward the minimum voter turnout but not the yes or no-- but others probably don't. Also, I proposed the vote on voting and I don't even remember the rules!

Perhaps we should put a little cheat sheet on the final proposal in press telling people the minimum voter turn out, the reality of no preference, and the 50% +1 thing.

Again, Jon posts for me.

Sophia, you mean something like the "voting" part in the Law Speak page?