You sound like much more of an ass. You obviously first responded without actually reading my comment. Wasting everyone's time instead of simply reading the comment you were responding to that had that info in it.

And now you can't even defend your previous points. You have to move the goalposts and bring up new points, half of which, again, I already addressed in that first comment you didn't read. I'll address your points and then I am done with you.

1. Trivial. Number all ballots the same then pick one of those numbers randomly. The votes already have to be counted together. If what you're saying is hard, then normal voting would also be hard.
2. That already happens with our current ballots. Sounds like you don't even vote if you don't know that.
3. No. Rephrasing something isn't an argument and it doesn't make it true.
4. The minority power point is by far your worst one. Random ballot actually gives better proportional representation on average, and makes gerrymandering more difficult, again, as I said in the first comment you didn't read. Unless you really believe democracy is supposed to strive to be "the tyranny of the majority," in which case, you're beyond help.

I'm done with you but if you try to argue things in the future, how about doing the absolute minimum and at least read what you're arguing against? Other ideas: Read a tiny bit of a related Wikipedia article. Double check your arguments before submitting them.