Bravo

joined 3 days ago
[–] Bravo@eviltoast.org 3 points 10 hours ago

Yeah, I was testing how robust the formula was by using the first adjective, curse word, and noun that I could see in my immediate environment. I'm not convinced it holds up.

[–] Bravo@eviltoast.org 5 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

Nothing much you designated pussy field.

[–] Bravo@eviltoast.org 1 points 10 hours ago

Put simply: if RCV had been in place for the US presidential race in 2024, the Gaza issue wouldn't have split the Democratic vote.

[–] Bravo@eviltoast.org 1 points 11 hours ago

Don't blame me; I voted for Kodos

[–] Bravo@eviltoast.org 1 points 11 hours ago

i’m not advocating that

You don't have to. Forbes already publishes a real-time up-to-date list of the richest people in the world.

https://www.forbes.com/real-time-billionaires/#5b60b1453d78

It can be sorted by net worth, country of residence, industry the person made their fortune in, or age.

[–] Bravo@eviltoast.org 1 points 11 hours ago

or sometimes no candidate

How does FPTP help in that scenario?

risks more people accidentally voting different than they wanted

Can you describe how that might happen?

[–] Bravo@eviltoast.org 1 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

It's not just the USA that's in dire need of it. The UK should also adopt it. First Past The Post (FPTP) voting encourages polarized extremism. Because it functions on a Ricky Bobby-esque "if you're not first, you're last" philosophy that punishes moderates for being moderate.

[–] Bravo@eviltoast.org 5 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Poe's law is an adage of Internet culture which says that, without a clear indicator of the author's intent, any parodic or sarcastic expression of extreme views can be mistaken by some readers for a sincere expression of those views.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law

Poe's law is based on a comment written by Nathan Poe in 2005 on christianforums.com, an Internet forum on Christianity. The message was posted during a debate on creationism, where a previous poster had remarked to another user: "Good thing you included the winky. Otherwise people might think you are serious".[4]

The reply by Nathan Poe read:[1]

Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is utterly impossible to parody a Creationist in such a way that someone won't mistake for the genuine article.

The original statement of Poe's law referred specifically to creationism, but it has since been generalized to apply to any kind of fundamentalism or extremism.[3]

[–] Bravo@eviltoast.org 11 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

I have to wonder: if headlines didn't specifically point out how this is a snub to Trump, would Trump even notice shit like this happening? Or understand its negative implications for him? Sometimes it feels like the news media is intentionally trying to get him riled up.

[–] Bravo@eviltoast.org 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's been deleted so don't blame lemmy

[–] Bravo@eviltoast.org 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] Bravo@eviltoast.org 3 points 2 days ago

Not all job creation is a net benefit to the public interest. Wars give lots of people jobs.

view more: next ›