How often should we vote — and on what issues, exactly? I don’t know. That’s a very tough question, and I suspect philosophers and political scientists haven’t reached consensus yet. In any case, I bet the right answer is not at any of the extremes (and I think you agree, according to your comment).

What I meant is that “more [ie, better] democracy” does not equate “voting more often”. It may also mean “deciding collectively about fewer issues” (ie, having fewer pointless rules and having smaller states). It may also mean “shortening term limits for elected officials”. It may also mean “better prosecuting corruption”. It may also mean “reducing spurious influences (eg, big money) in politics”. It may also mean “educating voters much better about issues”. And so on.

Therefore, one can pose the question of whether it is wise or not to call a referendum on some specific issue, and at the same time defend lots of measures towards a healthier democracy. And demand more referenda for other issues — only not for all conceivable issues.

I guess you agree with me that the “degree” of democracy a country can reasonably implement or tolerate depends on a number of factors. We can’t reasonably expect less developed countries to fare well if we polled their inhabitants about as many issues as the Swiss do. Only educated, wealthy and liberal citizens in a robust democracy can decide directly about so many issues.