You might be in a minority of 5% - so the discussion is still very necessary.
So you are one of those voters who spend lots of time in the booth, and cause huge queues on voting day. 
It doesnât mention anything about deviating in any way. This is the second time you have made up words. It says:
Your vote would NOT be counted
Above the line
You need to number at least 6 boxes consecutively in the order of your choice above the line.
{Their bolding}
Which is the same simplification as in the how to vote page. Obviously they are trying to get people to not limit their preferences and so reduce the power of their vote. You left out:
Note: There are vote-saving measures in electoral law that allow some votes that havenât completely met the voting rules to be counted.
So for the curious there is a reference to the exception to the rule. So if the AEC are setting out to spread disinformation they are not very good at it.
1 Like
@person I only offered my perspective, I didnât and donât discourage the discussion. Am I only 5%? It might be interesting to know how many do complete the entire form and disregard the fast option. Found a link up to 2016 that shows it is ever closer to the 5% you suggested each election. 2016 results showed a 3% decrease in above the line voting from the previous election. While not a huge decrease it still is statistically significant. Tasmania has a significant proportion who vote below the line (~25%) and around 20% for the ACT.
Above the line and below the line voting (aec.gov.au)
@Gregr I acknowledge the wink but just for interest I provide the following.
No, Iâm not a queue builder. I postal vote and that is for reasons that are acceptable to meet the requirements of a postal vote. Previously I have also attended Early Voting Booths when they have been provided, I have always been able to choose a booth that had few attendees and offered suitable access.
1 Like
It is also trying to maintain the spirit of the voting system. The voting system is a preferential one. If all parties successfully advocate for all voters to vote 1 above the line (only) then the voting system completely loses its preferential character and becomes a plurality system, which is in some ways inferior to a preferential system.
A person voting in some detail (whether above or below the line) can also increase speed by using one of the several vote-planning web sites i.e. where you work out ahead of time in exact detail how you are going to vote, print it out, take it with you on polling day (or pre-poll), and then just copy it to the form while in the booth.
Was this a decrease or an increase? With the simplified voting rules I would have expected an increase in ATL voting and hence a decrease in BTL voting.
1 Like
It is in the the details of the link to the AEC data I provided and was indeed a decrease in ATL voting between the 2013 election and the 2016 election. The graph shows it quite well:
1 Like
Got my words straight from the AEC site. So you now see what I see. And I didnât leave out the note about the vote saving measures; I explicitly said it was there and click on it.
The 2016 election for the senate was a rare one. Not only a full Senate election due to the double dissolution, but changed voting rules.
Many small political parties could not meet the rules to get a spot above the line on ballot papers so voters wanting to cast their vote for them needed to vote below the line.
A more useful graph I think would include both the 2019 and data after this current Senate election.
Itâs possibly a conspiracy in support of selling more democracy sausages to those waiting in line. Likely to be more expensive this year the price rise (pork is at a premium) may cause some voters to rethink their preferences.
To sausage or not to sausage. 
Should we legislate a maximum price for the democracy sausage and ensure it does not influence the outcome unduly?
- Yes I want the price of the democracy sausage fixed.
- No Iâm happy to be asked to pay more for my democracy sausage.
0
voters
1 Like
I donât see either of the phrases on the relevant AEC web pages, âyour vote will be invalidâ and âdeviate in any wayâ. If you think they are there could you provide a link please in each case.
Mostly a paraphrase will not matter in this case it does. If those words are yours instead of the AEC then you and I have no basis to determine what was written by the AEC, what it means and if it is deliberately misleading in respect of the Act. We are talking at cross purposes and should stop now.
1 Like
An interesting instruction on the AEC website.
âIf you vote above the line, you need to number at least six boxes from 1 to 6 .â
Apparently you can number 7 boxes, but you canât use the number 7 when doing so.
Pork is never at a premium during an election campaign. 
4 Likes
Donât follow you there. I numbered 7 boxes in the AEC practice senate votey thing, from 1 to 7 and it gave me a happy message that my vote would be valid.
He was making a joke about how you might very literally (mis)interpret the text that he quotes.
I guess the point is - as already made above: it is difficult to find the right balance between accuracy and readability.
1 Like
How could someone possibly think that if you wanted to number more than 6 above the line options you would be restricted to using only the digits 1 through 6?
The instruction only covers the minimum case of 6.
Is it really necessary to explain that if you want to number more than that you use higher digits to make the choices unique?.
What level of moronicy should be catered for?
Youâve already demonstrated that you understand the system. Most people donât. Most people donât give it much thought at all except every 3 years (federally).
Anyway, itâs perfectly valid to rank two candidates equally. Right?
Sadly âŠ
1 Like
Itâs not unusual Choice consumers possess a more critical eye and are astute enough to see past the marketing spin. We sometimes see things others donât.
The foghorn like sources of disinformation in any election campaign are less subtle. No need to debate the quality or value of the messaging. Some is more unbelievable thanâŠâŠ
So far I have accepted but 2 facts concerning the election, both reliably advised by the AEC. Firstly there is an election coming, and secondly I know the date. A third fact will become apparent when I turn up to vote, which is my name still being on the electoral role. Hope is I can remember how to count from one and write legibly the numbers required. Having read the more recent posts, I have doubts I will succeed.
1 Like
The AEC has informed me of the date of the election. May the 9th is when early voting opens in my electorate. Anything else that comes from political parties after my voting date is noise to be ignored.
You should add a third fact: who the candidates are (that are applicable to your area). This too is available from the AEC (web site). Depending of course on what your voting strategy is. I guess if a voter always donkey votes or always votes informally, it is not necessary to know who the candidates are.
I think that date applies to all electorates. At least, the AEC web site publishes that date without qualification that it depends on where you are.
Our experience is that there are fewer places in our electorate open for pre-poll initially. More open up closer to Election Day. Probably OK in the big smoke, but not so convenient where we are.
Theyâll be pleased to know that advice has been offered. 
The suggestion is there is only one, and that the others are just there to help out on the day. Hopefully this time there will be a need to go to a preference count.
