Arithmetic only

Yes, exactly. How many in favor? How many opposed? Done.

I'm (perhaps not surprisingly) of the same mind as Kristen. In fact, I stopped reading this thread because the talk about voting about whether or not to vote has me thoroughly confused. If the idea of voting about voting confuses me, I can't imagine voting about other things.

But , for example, if we decide to go with quorums minimum voter turnout, then there is more than one possible size for a turnout requirement. So how do we decide on minimum turnout size, or minimu yes vote size (as Maya suggested) without preference balloting? And since we would still only decide one issue at a time, you won't have that many votes.

the idea of voting about voting confuses me

For the first time, I feel sorry for Florida.

And by the way preference voting requires no math. Arithmetic only, and simple arithmetic at that. It just has to do it lots of times.

It just has to do it lots of times.

Aha! See! Not simple anymore.

And FTR I'm getting Borda dis.

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

First thing that's justified the thread title in ages.

But if we decide to reduce everything to binary choices, and then vote on things that require mutliple options, then we still have to do multiple balloting - another form of doing arithmetic multiple times. The Australian system is simpler than multiple ballots for the same number of choices.

how do we decide on minimum turnout size, or minimu yes vote size (as Maya suggested) without preference balloting?

You can do that with runoffs.

Or, if someone proposes a simple binary option, Simple Maj/Two-thirds deathmatch, and nobody objects, we can just make that choice and be done with it.

You know, I had foolishly thought that this voting idea was going to make things less complex.

Ah, but making things more bureaucratic NEVER simplifies anything.