We can see right through that nefarious scheme, Gar. Begone evil, easily-understood, wannabe preferential ballot. Begone for all our sakes.
Seriously, didn't we vote that preferential ballots or something should be used for multi-choice votes. Why are we so gung-ho on narrowing this down to two choices?
Jess you are right - there is no difference for the person counting. The diference is iin whether the person voting can follow how their choice and how others choices are counted. We had people screaming in agony because they could not figure out for certain how preferential votes are counted, and could not double check the count if they used such a ballot. This (with improved wording of course) would avoid that problem
Wolfram - itonly voted was that there would have to be a majority. How to get to a majority was not determined. From the point of view of someone counting, this is preferential voting. But from the point of view of a math resistant voter, I think it is still clear how each step works, and how votes will be counted.
Fuck it.
Vote early, vote often, vote monkey.
(Go three! Choose three!)
What would help at this point is getting some kind of count or voice on which is preferred, 3 months or 4.
I know we feel the need to decide immediately. But, in a world of 4 days mandatory discussion time plus three days of voting, what's another 3 days?
Why the fear of the runoff?
Just so my earlier three looks like I meant it.
Three. (As opposed to four.)
Which is not in any way related to my earlier six vote, because I never expressed a preference between the two.
Voting complexities make baby Jesus cry.
And make Dawn scream, "GETOUTGETOUTGETOUT!!!"