Moreover, I do find the ballot counting page and the various methods of counting confusing and a bit intransparent (or at least, intractable). So, after having tried it out in practice, I’d like to revisit Gabriella’s proposal to switch to the much more simple approval voting for next year.
Not the place to discuss this at length (unfortunately the issue linked by @piegames is no longer open for discussion), so I’ll just mention here for reference to those concerned about the voting system, that the mathematicians who designed the Majority Judgment (presenting it as a “theory and method of voting, judging and ranking, shown to be superior to all other known methods”, see a previous discussion about it there: Nix Community Survey 2023 - #10 by julm) published a paper in 2018 titled “Majority Judgment vs. Approval Voting” whose introduction states that:
While some AV [Approval Voting] supporters admit that MJ [Majority Judgment] allows “more nuanced judgments” [11] they steadfastly maintain that AV is superior, advancing a variety of reasons.
The first intent of this article is to present practical and theoretical evidence to show that every one of those “reasons” is either wrong, insignificant, and/or not realized in practice (and some, amusingly, are shared with AV).
[…] The second intent of the article is to show that two grades are too few (however AV is viewed). Two obviously permits no nuance in the expression of voters’ opinions, in and of itself this is sufficiently damning. AV’s behavior also shows that two is too few. It is proven that with MJ the no-show paradox—extremely unlikely in practice with three or more grades—cannot occur when there are three grades, so overcomes all the AV-enthusiasts’ criticisms.
In general, it is argued, majority judgment is a significantly better replacement for majority rule than approval voting has pretended to be.