Looking at the the bate that was debated by PR and EC on automatic registration, I could not help but to agree partly with the PR and partly to EC.
Been playing around with statistics at work when I was doing data mining for statistics in one of my previous undertaking, expansion of the scope of exponence will gauging of the percentage to refine and shrink thereafter. The increase of the exponence will cause the chance the scope of options to expand whilst causing the scope of determination to shift in the equations. Though the voting system does not have a quorum to meet, the range of options will cause the definitions of 2/3 majority to changed. the total rate of representation will now be lower if the exponence scope is expanded. The same will happen to the rate of opposing vote which will also rated lower. Assumption made is that the same number of people come out and vote and they did not change the decision of their vote.
Calling it the mathematical bluff, only thing that will show in this case is the number of turnout against qualified voters ratio shift. moving the majority of the voters, or in this case, the unvoters taking the stance of “none of the above”
PR wanted to increase the number of eligible voters to lower the rate of success by BN while EC is concerned about the turn out rate and the performing ratio.