If no option receives a majority, a run-off between the top two finishers will occur

I think "two" should be made more general in case there's a tie for second place.

I'm back.

How would we decide on a majority in those cases where more than two options are required?

But some folks have suggested that we do this vote by vote.

This is going round and round. I suggested some wording. It received 4 seconds. Can't we just go with it and get the basic question decided?

Burrell: The problem with yours is that there seems to be an assumption that Option 2 in vote 1 will win. If Option 1 wins, then the point is moot.

I like Jon's Ballot, although, to satisfy those who voted Supermajority, I'd add another question:

Item 2

Would a clearer definition of Simple Majority have affected your vote last week? (Perhaps with a link to the previous question.)
A) Yes
B) No

I don't understand the purpose of asking that question, Gandalfe. What do we do with the answer?

I think the ballot should just be kept simple. Whatever gets the most votes versus 50% + 1. Maybe throw in "regardless of the amount of options". But all this talk of preferential voting and run-offs being included in the actual ballot is just going to cloud the issue. Preferential voting wasn't even mentioned in the last vote, so if this vote is to clarify the first vote, including other stuff is unnecessary.

I also don't think that the vote should necessarily be what the person intended at the time. If they've changed their minds, then so be it. It will still represent the will of the Buffistas now. And isn't that what everybody wants?

including other stuff is unnecessary.

I think the lack of "other stuff" is what got us into trouble in the first place. All I've done is explained the implications of the two options in what I feel is a balanced way.

I think the lack of "other stuff" is what got us into trouble in the first place. All I've done is explained the implications of the two options in what I feel is a balanced way.

Hey, it wasn't an attack on you or anything. I just think to include all of that extra stuff in there, is asking people something different than was asked in the first vote. I though the intent of this second vote was simply to clarify what people want simple majority to mean, not to poll them on a bunch of stuff that was thought of afterward.

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.

Again, not saying that there's anything wrong with the wording. I just think that considering everyone's frustration at the conversation that's taking place now, that some people will vote against 50% + 1, even if that's what they prefer, simply because they won't want to go through even more processes and conversations just to get at a final result.

Speaking of voting headaches, just imagine a poll on this.

Cute Wolfram.

I didn't feel attacked, Denise. No worries. But what in my wording do you think is different from what was in the first vote? I believe that I *am* clarifying.

And I have to say I find it amusing that connie thinks my wording for option one is loaded while you think my wording for option two is loaded. It's like when NPR runs a story on the Middle East and they get letters from Israeli and Palestinian supporters each claiming the story was baised toward the other side. :)

I didn't feel attacked, Denise. No worries. But what in my wording do you think is different from what was in the first vote? I believe that I *am* clarifying.

I just think that if the questions are kept simpler, we''ll get a simpler and more honest answer as to what people think simple majority should mean. Just what they think it means not tainted by what and how many different processes may or may not come with it.

And I have to say I find it amusing that connie thinks my wording for option one is loaded while you think my wording for option two is loaded. It's like when NPR runs a story on the Middle East and they get letters from Israeli and Palestinian supporters each claiming the story was baised toward the other side. :)

Actually, I'm for most votes wins regardless of what percentage of the total vote the winner holds. I just think people are getting fed up with every question having 17 more questions attached to it. However the ballot is worded isn't going to change my vote, but I do think it has the potential to affect other people's votes.