Remove the concept of an explicit 'blank vote'

[dsernst]

The first working version of the vote-tallying algorithm allowed for 4 possible voter positions:

1. for
2. against
3. abstain (explicit)
4. no vote (inherits)

This third option, abstain, was already renamed to blank to clarify the distinction between not showing up vs being present but not preferring either yay or nay.

The idea was to match the same options available in existing voting systems, which sometimes include a "present" vote which doesn't count either way.

In the vote-tallying algorithm, blank votes are treated as an explicit "don't inherit from my delegate", and don't count me as for or against. Contrast that with any other explicit vote, which override a delegate, and simply not voting, which inherits.

But after sharing a working version of the demo with other people, who were otherwise enthusiastic about this project, it's clear that this blank option is confusing. And it's not even all that obvious what its use-case is for Liquid Democracy. It seems to convey "I don't trust my delegate", which is more easily solved by changing your delegate.

So, I propose we remove this blank vote for now. That will make the whole system easier to understand (which is already a challenge) and if it becomes compelling we can always add it back as an option.

Now the positions would be:

1. for
2. against
3. no vote (inherits)

[jaredscheib]

I'm overall ok with merging this, and it's good work that helps to simplify (by removing the "blank" vote), but I'm concerned that it oversimplifies without trying to communicate explicitly and clearly what the blank vote means. So, I would suggest that this demo be titled "Liquid Democracy Simulation – Delegation", or something like that, to indicate that this is demonstrating delegation, while also implying that some parts of a full Liquid Democracy may be missing (blank vote, in this case), until we can better communicate and trial the blank vote version.