FPTP is the general default for most Western democracies but there are merits to AV systems.
In all seriousness, this was just to show how easily the initial vote could have (should have) been communicated to everyone, both ingame and on the externals.
It's been rightly pointed out that the fact that anything over 50% would be considered by Tracey (as she mentioned herself on the "State of the World" thread) was not communicated in game.
I still think the 66.67% is a petty argument used to derail the value of a perfectly fair vote (everyone had the vote, those who cared enough about the subject cast theirs) but in terms of the overall vote, everyone citing this as a reason for the original vote to be null and void has a valid case based on the initial terms set out by Tracey.
I just think it would have avoided a lot of the confusion and fallout from the first vote if it had been communicated in simple language to everyone and a realistic, tried and tested means of voting had been used.
66.67% of the world was never going to vote because the majority either don't care or are too lazy to. The non-vote, as in any vote, is never a factor so it shouldn't have been an issue in this vote.
Democratically, offering the vote to everyone served a fundamental purpose. Players are encouraged (expected?) to vote on issues as important as this because it affects the world.
Personally, I'm all for cheaper nobles but I also respect the reasons and decisions of those who don't agree with me, providing it's within a fair, representative vote. We didn't have that first time round.
Thankfully this has been set out in the next, definitive vote and I hope that all the players in the world take a second to cast their vote on an important subject.
If players don't vote, whichever way, it's their loss and they only have their apathy and laziness to blame because the opportunity has been provided to all.
