Malibu Stacey was riffing on Barbie.

I stand corrected. Sorry Gandalfe.

You'd get nearly the same results as preference voting if you simple had people vote for the largest number of seconders that they would support (so, by voting for "6", you're saying that you're ok with 6 or below.).

Very interesting.

I have a point about the validity of votes that needs addressing.

If you give me four things to vote for, and tell me to vote for them as my first, second, third and fourth choices, what happens to votes which are "incorrect", for instance:

I vote them all "1".

I slip and vote them as my first, second, second and third choices.

I vote "1" for the choice I want and leave the rest blank.

In those cases, what gets counted? The usable portion of the vote? Or does it get thrown out?

If Jon B or anyone else is happy to code PHP that keeps saying "nuh-uh, try again, bozo" then that problem will be solved, but it'll be a pain.

Or, is it my constitutional right to assign a single option a "1" because I believe so strongly that that's the only option I could bear to live with?

Or for a better example (from my post a ways back), Let's say for votor turnout my first choice is 30. My second and third choices would probably be 40 and 20 (or vice versa), not 20 and 10. I'd want something near my first choice, not necessarily less than my first choice. Your logic may vary. Which is why I like preferential voting.

Math is scary, that's what math is.

All I gotta say is that it's called a simple majority because it's simple!

If Jon B or anyone else is happy to code PHP that keeps saying "nuh-uh, try again, bozo" then that problem will be solved, but it'll be a pain.

I've been thinking about that very issue. I don't think it will be a pain to code, and I'm happy to do it.

So you'd rank them 6 8 4 10 2 0? (I assume you'd still rather have 2 than 0, after all.) Then you can vote for 10, knowing that if enough people like 6-or-fewer, it'll win; if not, it'll go up to 8, and if not, it'll go all the way to 10. (And if 4 winds, then over half of the people don't like any option higher than 4, so it doesn't matter if you prefered 6, 8, or 10).

I really think this works for both seconding and voter turnout, unless you think anyone would prefer, in order, 6-2-4, or (for turnout), 50-20-30.

I don't think it will be a pain to code, and I'm happy to do it.

Cool. So you'd go with drop menus? And validate that each one had a unique value in it?

You could validate with JavaScript of course, but you'd have to do it again, server-side, just in case. I'll help with JavaScript if needed.

Then you can vote for 10, knowing that if enough people like 6-or-fewer, it'll win; if not, it'll go up to 8, and if not, it'll go all the way to 10.

But what if everyone thinks this way? 10 wins even though everyone wanted 6.

The beauty of the Australian method of preferential balloting is that (Gar's extreme example aside) you don't have to strategize your vote. You vote for what you want. If it has the lowest number of votes, then your vote goes to your second choice, and so on.

As much as this whole process pains me (why did we vote for voting, why? the system was not broken! t /rant ), I wonder if we need two different abstention options -- one for "Neither of these options is good for me, we really need to talk more" and one for "I'd be happy with either, I just really like voting." Because I see a major difference between the two, and there's no way to distinguish them in our current ballot.

Cool. So you'd go with drop menus? And validate that each one had a unique value in it?

Yeah, something lke that. Let's take this offline or to BBaBB if you want to toss around ideas.

Oh, but technical questions aside, there are constitutional questions -- do we force people to assign a preference to each option? Or do we validate simply that they haven't assigned things illogically as in the case of the "first, second, second, fourth" vote?