[Vote] (7-90) Lower Supermajority Vote Threshold To 70%

[pineappledan]

Or we could just vote on the thing people voted for the first time

 

[rkkn]

counts abstentions as 80% of a vote for changing the threshold and 20% against

this can also be seen in the opposite way. voting for every option moves the tally away from a supermajority

 

[CppMaster]

Don't worry. I'm already assuming next vote for even lower threshold

 

[Recursive]

It is more accurate and sensible to consider the votes in pairwise groups, rather than simply tally their votes as a total of the 112 respondents. Because people voted for multiple options you have some votes that get double-counted if you don't filter out duplicate votes.

You're using the fact that 67 voted for a 66.7% threshold while 42 voted to keep it at 75% as a reason not to go all the way down to the lowest threshold despite the fact that 14 of those votes are by the same 7 people.
If you take the ratios as presented then lowering the threshold to 66.7% is 1.60x more popular than keeping it where it is (67/42)
However, If you eliminate the votes of users that voted for both options, and could be counted as abstaining, then lowering the threshold to 66.7% is 1.71x more popular than keeping it where it is (60/35)
If you consider lowering the threshold to 66.7 in isolation you have 60 yea, 35 nay, and 7 abstains for a total of 102 of your original 112 voters. 'Yea' won this pairwise poll by 63.1% of the vote, not 59.8%
This still does not meet your 2:1 threshold that you set, but it's a fair bit closer than you indicated.

This way of tallying votes gives too much power to people who voted for multiple options. 6 users voted for every option, meaning that he effectively abstained, but using this method they voted 4x more in favor of lowering the threshold than keeping it the same.

That's a fair argument, but if we have 35 people opposed to it and not even twice as many in favor I have serious reservations about introducing major, potentially irreversible changes. As I said, I'd rather not lose a good chunk of the player base by transforming VP into something that the community doesn't broadly want.

That may not be the case in the final vote considering the multiple options, of course (I admit I was surprised by how strong the community support was here).

70% has (currently) an 87.77% majority in favor which is enough of a consensus to feel confident that it is something people would be happy with.

To be fair, I will do a followup vote for a two-thirds majority and see what people think, but whether that vote passes or fails, we'll have a more equitable outcome confirmed by the community already. If reducing it to two-thirds is also broadly popular or nearly as much, then it can be lowered further, though I don't think going below two-thirds is fair to the minority.

 

[Heinz_Guderian]

Voted yea, but I think 2/3 should be the vote.

 

[Recursive]

There is a very clear and overwhelming community consensus in favor. I'll close this vote thread. The threshold will be lowered to 70%.

A followup vote to see if it should be further reduced to 66.67% has been created: (7-91) Lower Supermajority Vote Threshold From 70% to Two-Thirds (66.67%)

 

[Recursive]

Timestamp post to arrange all the threads in a neat order.