Grim,
You speak of the rules of the game, but the rules are set by the two major parties, because it favours them.

We should not discriminate against the minor parties because no new party can expect to be born full grown and they must have opportunuty to establish themselves and put their policies forward.

It seems optional preferential voting is the best way and all parties and candidates should show exactly where the want their preferences to go.

If you vote below the line, with OP, you can stop when you wish.

No argument, Banjo. John D. convinced me I was wrong.
I still think every voter should list at least 3 preferences, so their vote isn't discounted if their first preference doesn't get up, but I accept that if were made mandatory it could only increase the no. of votes declared informal.
Of course, if voting wasn't compulsory, the people who did bother would probably also take the trouble to list preferences.

Grim: If someone doesn't want to allocate preferences that is their option. Votes should only become informal at a point where it is not clear who they are voting for (or allocating preferences) to. If someone makes a mistake an allocates two second preferences a vote should be put aside at the point where this is causing confusion and may be brought back into the vote when this confusion is no longer causing problems.

Yes, that is what I agreed to.
My final comment was about compulsory voting, not compulsory preferences.
I think it would be reasonable to assume voluntary voters would show a little more care than people forced into voting booths.

< Votes should only become informal at a point where it is not clear who they are voting for (or allocating preferences) to >

Agreed John D.

The requirement to mark every square below the line, if you chose to vote below the line, is just ludicrous. You should be able to mark one square or as many squares as you wish.

If under this system, you mark two squares with the same number, your allocation of preferences vote would stop at the previous number, but your vote would still count.

As for compulsory voting, I am in favour of it. I think it is the least that every person over the voting age and of reasonably sound mind, and not in legal incarceration, should be required to do in order to play a part in the governance of our democracy.

I think it is the least that every person over the voting age and of reasonably sound mind, and not in legal incarceration, should be ALLOWED to do in order to play a part in the governance of our democracy.
It seems to me, compulsory voting is very much like asking someone you don't know and who knows absolutely nothing about cars and cares less, to help you make an informed opinion on which car you should buy.
Sounds like a great formula for buying really shoddy...

Cars.