I guess we all got Batman wrong for the bonus points. I don't see anyone guessing Denison for biggest wing. 
AV is just strange.
So strange that in 145/150 seats, it performed perfectly and ensured an absolutely democratic, quick and correct count and result, and in the other 5 a truly democratic outcome will be reached within days, ensuring every voter's voice is heard properly.
I know I tend to be a bit too parochial, but I genuinely believe that the AEC and the Australian electoral system are as close to perfect as they can be. Add a 151st seat (or remove the 150th) and tweak the senate voting system so people can number every box above the line should they chose to do so, and I'd reckon it'd be perfect.
Agree on all points. One thought I was kicking around on a 151st seat - could be a national at-large, which would basically go to the party with the most support (2PP) across the country, which I think would be a handy way of resolving ties. Perhaps have it linked to the party (like the Senate is), so it stays within the party instead of a by-election if something happens to the Member.
Incidently, the fact that there is not yet a result in those final five seats has nothing to do with AV/IRV and everything to do with the counting method - firstly, postals still have a few days to trickle in (they need to be postmarked from before the election, but that allows time for some to arrive from remote parts of Australia and overseas) and also by comparison, the UK counts throughout the night until there's a result... we count the booths then, and then we re-count to check for mistakes, and then we add in the postals - that's why it takes long... nothing to do with preference flows. Denison is the only place where that claim could be made, but again it will be finalised quickly once all the postals are in/counted. In the meantime, the lead can change because the second-placed candidate could fall behind the third-placed candidate (as happened yesterday), but this is no different from any other two candidates who are close together, either of whom could win (such as in Dunkley, Boothby, Hasluck, Corangamite, etc). Likewise, if the UK adopted a counting method like Australia's where there is an automatic recount in every seat and where postals can trickle in for a few days following the election, there would probably be close seats there that would change during the week following the election, even under FPTP. This sort of close result/flipping of seats happens every election - for the past two federal elections, I've scrutineered the recount/postals in a marginal seat for this very reason.
