I don't see much point in polling just to see what people thought at the time they voted - certain things weren't really on the table then, like various preferential set-ups, and some folks have indicated that they've changed their minds. I'd say scrap that one question and repoll on this issue. Perhaps something like this:

What is your preference for determining outcomes when more than two options appear on the ballot?

A) One option must receive a majority (50% + 1) of votes cast. If no option receives a majority, no action will result.

B) One option must receive a majority (50% + 1) of votes cast. If no option receives a majority, a run-off between the top two finishers will occur.

C) Preferential voting should be implemented so that one option receives the required majority. [Link to brief explanation, e.g. John's chart]

D) Option receiving the most votes wins, regardless of whether they constitute a majority as defined above.

I, too, about about to claw my eyes out, but brenda, as much as I think that is great, if we have more than 2 choices how are we going to determine the winner? With a preferential ballot?

edited to add that I was trying for levity. not sure if that got across.

how are we going to determine the winner? With a preferential ballot?

Hee! I was thinking the same thing...

This time? I'd say go to immediate runoff. Just to not get into the preferential argument prematurely. Clunkier, but won't require us to debate it all night.

(FTR, I have no objection to pref voting, but the very question is dragging us through the dirt here, and I think we need to get beyond it one way or another.)

I would prefer just deciding between two options for now.

Here's how I would reword (with thanks to John and Wolfram), with what I hope are balanced clarifications at the bottom so people know what they're voting for:

Supermajority has been defeated, but it turns out we didn't all mean the same thing when we voted for "simple majority". What do you think a "simple majority" means and how would you like it applied to determine future votes?

Choice 1: An option which receives more than 50% of the vote wins.

Choice 2: Whichever option has the most votes wins.

Choice 1 means that in the rare cases where a ballot question has more than two choices, there will need to be runoff ballots, or you will have to vote preferentially, or we will decide that the vote fails if no choice initially gets 50%. We will decide this either vote by vote, or else there will be another vote where this gets decided for all future ballots.

Choice 2 means that a choice could win even though it received only a small percentage of the total votes cast. For example, if there are five choices that receive 22%, 21%, 20%, 19%, 18%, the choice that recived 22% would win with no further balloting.

I like your ballot, Jon. It lays out what may or may not have to be decided in the future.

I like Jon's ballot a lot. Nice ballot.

Jon's ballot would work for me.

choice could win even though it received only a small percentage of the total votes cast.

I hate myself for this, but ... how about "choice which has the largest number of votes wins" as opposed to "only a small percentage of the totla votes cast"? Because to be honest, the phrasing as it stands is a little leading.

edit: by which I mean, the phrasing isn't neutral

In full honesty, supramajority lost unfairly. It might also lose fairly, and I REALLY don't want extra voting, but I just thought it should be stated for the record.