@Okin. Actually the burden of proof is on your side as it is you who wants to change the rules. What ever way you turn it, more people actually voted for the original suggestion, and even more did not care. Hence in order to achieve a greater number with your proposal (which should be expected at least) you would need more votes that the rules already applied.
Some may even argue that in order to change an established rule you might need 2/3 of the votes, but you did not get 50% even when disregarding other votes.
Edit: But you could however argue for a second voting round where only the two most voted for result were available and then try to garner more votes from either undecided or 2 stacks. Odds are that 2 stacks might move to your position and that more undecideds might move as well, seeing that few throwing weapons were used in the actual tournament.
There's no point in dragging it out further, Ramses has obviously made up his mind and it won't have any impact on the tournament at this stage. I'm much more interested in hearing him say something about the "mercs".
However, since you brought it up again, I think you're looking at this wrong. The "Undecided" option basically means "I don't care either way, I just want to see the poll result." It's not fair to count them as votes in favor of the status quo, that's completely misleading to the voters. If there's no genuine way to vote without voting, then there shouldn't be a "neutral" option in the first place. This isn't like a parliamentary session where there's a preset number of voters, so the bit about "abstaining" votes counting into the total you have to beat is silly. So I disagree with Ramses there.
You, however, seem to be saying that a single "change" option should actually outnumber the "no change" option? That's even more unreasonable, just imagine a case of 50 for no change and 45 for each of the potential changes. Are you seriously saying that should count as a majority in favor of keeping the current rule? If so, then the whole vote is rigged to fail by virtue of having two separate options for changes in the first place.
If you want to set some arbitrary ratio target, then whatever, but by my count the vote is 63 in favor of changing, 60 in favor of keeping it like it is. And with that I'm done discussing the matter.
Poll