I'll preface this by saying I am not voting, as the odds of me attending any tournament anywhere are very, very poor at this time. (If things improve in the near future, then I'll reconsider my options.)
That said ....
To me, this seems an ass-backward way of going about this. "Let's find somewhere that people want to go, then we'll see if a tournament can be organised there."
That's incredibly silly. What you need is someone willing and able to organise a tournament in a particular location (wherever that location may be), and then advertise the appropriate details so that everyone else can determine whether they want to go there. Then you vote.
Also, as I recall, the original idea was for a floating tournament, to represent the richness and variety in the region. It's not a floating tournament if it doesn't float. I'm sure Siem Reap was lovely, I'm very sorry that I wasn't able to make it, but going back there immediately means that it's no longer an "Asia-Pacific Tournament", it's a "Cambodia" tournament. Not that a "Cambodia" tournament is inherently a bad thing, but it's a different thing to an "Asia-Pacific Tournament".
A floating tournament should not repeat a location until it has to; and if it has to, it's perhaps time to reconsider the whole concept. If I was voting, I'd vote for any location that has not yet held a tournament before I'd vote for any location that has.
Oh, and where are all the other possible locations? If there's only three places in the entire Asia-Pacific region that can host a tournament, why are we even bothering with going through the charade of a "vote"?