When they lay on their belly with their legs all splayed out.

Calling nexus mods shady is hilarious.

Companies spend hundreds of millions on lots of shit that doesn’t work. There have been plenty of studies saying that ads are not nearly as effective as companies think they are. Do you think that companies are somehow smarter than the people outside those companies?

Being exposed to a product that exists is not an ad. An ad is explicitly something that a company has paid to make visible to people. If a company isn’t paying for it then it’s not an ad, no matter how much it sounds like one.

And yes, going to a store and trying shit out is exactly how it should go. Reading reviews and talking to others is exactly how it should go. Companies paying to manipulate people of the world using psychology is what ads are. Not seeing a product being used in the wild.

a paid notice that is published or broadcast (as to attract customers or to provide information of public interest)

It does only the last one and only partially.

She literally can. There’s absolutely nothing preventing any member of the government from lying for any reason, no matter what, unless they’re on the stand. Campaigning is not a court room.

Hawaiian coffee is $25 a pound, at least it was when I bought some there a few years ago

I can give you a bunch of arguments against it. You can just go look at my history if you want a bunch of sources. Not really possible to boil it down to a short and sweet answer sadly, but in general there are much better voting methods and ones that vastly fewer problems. RCV was invented before we had a lot of data on elections and how people vote and we’ve learned a lot since then. RCV is almost always a bad choice if you’re trying to implement a new system. Either go with approval for simplicity, or STAR or 3-2-1 if you want a very good election system with all of the benefits of RCV and none of the drawbacks.

Approval is good and should be used to move to either STAR or 3-2-1. RCV is barely better than Plurality and this ballot is just one example of how RCV implementations can cause issues.

Once she was selected as the nominee she could have said anything she wanted. She’s only VP for a few more months.

I’ve never even heard of it. Sounds excellent though. 😂

https://chriswarrick.com/blog/2023/01/15/how-to-improve-python-packaging/

I think you have got to be meme’ing. You literally wrote 7 paragraphs about how to build something for python when for other languages it’s literally a single command. For Ruby, it’s literally bundle. Nothing else. Doesn’t matter if it’s got C packages or not. Doesn’t matter if it’s windows or not. Doesn’t matter if you have a different project one folder over that uses an older gem or not. Doesn’t matter if it’s 15 years old or not. One command.

Just for comparison for gradle it’s ./gradlew build For maven is mvn install For Elixir it’s mix deps.get mix compile For node it’s npm install

every other language it’s hardly more than 1 command.

Python is the only language that thinks that it’s even slightly acceptable to have virtual environments when it was universally decided upon decades ago to be a tremendously bad idea. Just like node_modules which also was known to be a bad idea before npm decided to try it out again, only for it to be proven to be a bad idea right off the bat. And all the other python build tools have agreed that virtual envs are bad.

and yet that all works fine in Ruby, which came out around the same time as Python and yet has had Bundler for 15 years now.

Python - 15+ package managers and build tools Ruby - 1

the closest language to look at for packaging is probably lua, which has similar issues. however since lua is usually not a standalone application platform it’s not a big deal there.

no the closest language is literally Ruby, it’s almost the exact same language, except the tooling isn’t insane and it came out only a few years after python.

You have been in lala land for too long. That list of things to do is insane. Venv is possibly one of the worst solutions around, but many Python devs are incapable of seeing how bad it is. Just for comparison, so you can understand, in Ruby literally everything you did is covered by one command bundle. On every system.

All of the 3 ninjas movies. I was telling my wife about them and was talking about how great they were (this was like a decade ago) and went to look them up. Like 0-35% on rotten tomatoes depending on which one.

3 Ninjas: High Noon at Mega Mountain is particularly bad at 0% critic score, 29% audience score, and a 3 on IMDb.

I loved all the 3 ninjas movies so much though.

There’s a good document from the SWAG reverse proxy that explains it all. I reverse proxy everything on my unraid server through swag and have for years.

The longest load for a page you haven’t encountered before is under a second, because it’s loading thousands of items. The longest paint is 176ms. It was averaging like 17ms. It’s incredibly fast.

I’m not just going by the happy graph. It’s spreading and you’re having to go back to the 1940s to tell me how it’s getting repealed.

you didn’t even bother reading enough to find out it was repealed in Aspen, CO the state this vote is occuring in in 2009, in Telluride, CO (once again the state this vote is occurring in) in 2019. It was repealed in Burlington, VT in 2009, in Virginia in 2023. Did you just randomly choose Yonkers from the middle of the list and completely ignore the first four entries? Come on. You’re better than that. It’s on the ballot right now in Alaska, did you ignore that link too? The one where Ballotpedia is saying it’s been banned in 5 states just in 2024 alone??? https://news.ballotpedia.org/2024/07/16/more-states-banned-ranked-choice-voting-in-2024-than-any-other-year/

I’m not just going by the happy graph. It’s spreading and you’re having to go back to the 1940s to tell me how it’s getting repealed.

Where has it been removed from use in the US in just the past few years? I’m not talking about somewhere where the Republicans got scared and preemptively banned it. That’s different. I’m talking about somewhere where people tried it, the voters reported not liking it, and there was a consequent removal of it from use.

dude. you’re literally just cherry picking data out of the links I provided. There was a list of locations that repealed it, just in the past decade alone. You’re ignoring it.

• Aspen, CO 2009
• Burlington, VT 2009
• Telluride, CO 2019
• Arlington, VA 2023

Alaska is on the ballot to repeal this year as well

40 bills just this year to repeal or ban RCV. https://news.ballotpedia.org/2024/04/02/rcv-bans-and-repeals-advancing-at-higher-rate-than-new-authorizations/

I’m not talking about somewhere where the Republicans got scared and preemptively banned it. That’s different. I’m talking about somewhere where people tried it, the voters reported not liking it, and there was a consequent removal of it from use.

This is completely pointless to have this discussion then. Preemptively banning it is a great sign that you’re not going to have a strong enough market to retain the voting style after it’s implemented. If it’s already this difficult to get it implemented then having entire states that are hellbent on banning it is exactly the kind of thing you shouldn’t be trying to get past. You should choose a method that 1. doesn’t have any of the problems that republicans could even slightly pin on the voting method. 2. is easier to understand and therefore harder to convince citizens it’s a boogieman 3. doesn’t have an organization that is repeatedly lying about the problems with the method in order to convince voters. All it does is make it easier to attack.

They did it once, there was controversy, then they kept it. What’s the issue?

they didn’t keep it. they repealed it for 14 years. It was brought back last year in a much smaller form, which you literally would have seen if you read the list of locations.

None of what you have said at all matters anyway. RCV not only has a bad name (as is evidenced by the GOP continually attacking it and implementing bans across the nation), but it’s just not a good voting method. It has sooooo many problems, the LEAST of which is it getting repealed. It’s confusing, results in strategic voters, lower Voter Satisfaction, harder to count, allows spoilers, has several organizations that lie about the problems with it, and it will prevent us from moving to a better system in the future.

All of this you would have known if you bothered to read anything I linked, which I know you didn’t because those links take hours to read. You didn’t even do a good job scanning one of them.

Your bullshit o-meter is miscalibrated. Maybe look at other sources besides FairVote (here’s a nice little article covering just one of fairvote’s complete misrepresentations https://www.rangevoting.org/LNH.html) and then come back to the conversation. I was trying to be completely non-adversarial here and just explain my reasoning, and then you come in with ‘bullshit alarms’ and then reveal you didn’t even bother to read the sources I provided. Not a good look, especially not with other members of the community acting like this.

3-2-1 is by far the best from a “works in every situation” perspective, it’s literally just a better RCV without all the strategic voting concerns. STAR is second best but only because it’s more complicated and has possible worse outcomes, even though best case outcomes are far better. Most results say that STAR is better, but I find it significantly harder to understand and believe that most voters would believe the same, thus increasing the chance of it getting repealed. The best ‘new’ voting system is the system that lasts and never needs to be replaced. That is the main criteria we should be going for, because we have seen it all over the country where RCV was approved by voters, was either too confusing or caused ‘spoiled’ results, and then was immediately repealed back to plurality and those regions have never gone back to RCV.

Even Approval voting is better, and is simpler than all of these. I will point out that literally every RCV campaign states that Approval voting has problems that are actually much more prevalent in RCV, for example FairVote.org states that

Approval voting can be challenging for voters with strong preferences. A vote for a second choice counts exactly as much as a vote for a first choice, creating incentives to “bullet vote,” or choose only one candidate, even when voters have second- or third-choice preferences. Because voters can’t back compromise candidates without weakening their first choice, the use of strategic voting increases — especially in contested elections.

which is just outright incorrect. Voting for multiple candidates can never weaken any of your choices and it’s honestly insane a bunch of the claims that FairVote makes.

Honestly a bunch of the groups that are pushing for RCV just straight up lie about a lot of it. Aside from being removed from use in many locations in the US in just the past few years, they completely ignore how bad strategic voting is getting in the US, meaning we need to choose even stronger methods against strategic voting. Elon Musk is literally paying people to vote right now. They also ignore how confusing a ballot can be to many americans. I think this is a terrible reason, but it is a reason. The more chances you give someone to mess something up, the less they are going to like it and the more they’re going to be able to blame it for things they don’t like happening.

Here’s a simulator to show you how RCV can spoil the vote (like it did in Egypt and Burlington, VT) : https://howtofixtheelection.com/ballot/newer/

In any case, for me I do not want a repeat of Aspen, or Burlington, or any of the numerous other bans that are occurring or have occurred of RCV causing people to not want to even try new voting systems. https://news.ballotpedia.org/2024/07/16/more-states-banned-ranked-choice-voting-in-2024-than-any-other-year/

https://electionscience.github.io/vse-sim/ https://www.equal.vote/accuracy https://www.starvoting.org/star https://dmarron.com/2010/09/19/the-feud-over-the-2009-burlington-mayoral-election/ https://better-count-us.medium.com/no-instant-runoff-wouldnt-solve-spoiled-elections-7f6136f1d0ee https://fairvote.org/resources/electoral-systems/ranked_choice_voting_vs_approval_voting/ https://ballotpedia.org/Ranked-choice_voting_(RCV)#States_and_localities_that_stopped_using_RCV https://news.ballotpedia.org/2024/07/16/more-states-banned-ranked-choice-voting-in-2024-than-any-other-year/

edit: one last source: testimony from court where common RCV claims were disproven and alternatives were provided like STAR. https://olis.oregonlegislature.gov/liz/2021R1/Downloads/PublicTestimonyDocument/17728