Fact checking is woke

OP is wasting time tilting at windmills to attack people who agree with them while the GQP does real damage.

Ehhhhh you’re kind of ignoring in power/out of power dynamics here and the overwhelmingly conservative slant they’ve adopted the last few years.

Who are “they”? What other systems are they advocating for? All I ever see on Lemmy is people hating FPTP (rightfully so) and in favor of RCV (rightfully so) with the occasional person remarking on limitations or (more commonly in my experience) saying it’s not a magic bullet solution and is only part of comprehensive reform. An kmportant part of it, no doubt, but still a part and a lot of people seem to overestimate RCV‘s ability to save us.

Pointing this out does not make one against RCV.

This was disappointing but I’ll move on. Clearly this is not going to be productive.

It doesn’t force cities to do anything. It just tells people living on the street they’re not allowed to be anywhere. It ignores that they have no desire to be there and have nowhere to go.

It’s like “no urinating in public.” Cities are not obligated to provide a reasonable number of public restrooms per some set area. In fact they’re not obligated to have any, typically. They simply punish people and then shrug when you bring up biological necessity.

I’m not offended and I think they are mischaracterizing a valid dialogue. They’re picking a fight with people who largely agree with them and are reducing everyone’s point to “don’t bother changing anything until we find a perfect solution,” which is not something I’ve ever seen surrounding RCV. Frankly I’d like to see them show examples. They just seem upset people are discussing the merits as well as the shortcomings, even if most of us still think it should be implemented.

I usually agree with your posts because you are a pretty smart person who I regularly see introduce nuance, so I am surprised to see such a strong reaction from you here.

The source is the article OP linked below the tweet.

The Supreme Court agreed to take the case after hearing from an unlikely coalition that spanned the political spectrum, including liberals such as California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) and officials in Republican-led states such as Montana and Alabama. The officials described governments overwhelmed by the scale and complexity of homelessness. More than 600,000 people are homeless nationwide, according to federal data, and nearly half sleep outside.

Newsom — who leads the state with the country’s largest unhoused population and frequently criticizes the high court’s conservatives — welcomed the decision, saying it provides “definitive authority to implement and enforce policies to clear unsafe encampments from our streets.” This decision removes the legal ambiguities that have tied the hands of local officials for years and limited their ability to deliver on common-sense measures to protect the safety and well-being of our communities.”

The first sentence/paragraph from OP

Seeing as how some people here on Lemmy get upset at any mention of Ranked Choice Voting and respond that, in their opinion, it’s not perfect, and that we should therefore keep the voting system we have while we debate which alternative is perfect for several decades, allow me to preemptively respond.

I agree it does not solve our problem but it would make more than just a marginal difference. It would heavily disincentivize going too far politically one way to win your primary.

The vast majority of people here advocate for RCV and some occasionally introduce nuance to discuss its pro/cons just to make sure people don’t (mistakenly) think it’ll solve all our problems. You are being needlessly passive aggressive and tilting at windmills in your opening text all because people don’t 100% praise it top to bottom with every comment.

Shame on Gavin Newsom for pushing this.

Nope total access unless you both want to play the exact same game at the same time. It’s great lol

Come on dude…are you kidding? You and I could do a family share without any risk to each other and share our entire libraries tonight. That is not the sameas handing off to your buddies. I love the family sharing program, I am currently using it. I am not against piracy. Let’s get all that out of the way.

Surely you see the potential issue here if this is supposed to be a family sharing program?

Yeah but that’s only a problem if both of you want to play the same game at the exact same time. It’s like sharing a physical copy of a game with your friend but it instantly transports to their computer/console.

So stats tells us.

If every single person on Lemmy voted third-party I guarantee you they wouldn’t carry a single state. In a two party dominated FPTP/winner takes all system voting third-party for president is irresponsible

I cannot imagine they’re going to keep family sharing as is - currently a couple of buddies and I shared a family account and now we all have access to over 700 games. I only had to coordinate with one of them, we all basically chained off each other. The abuse must be massive.

deleted by creator

He shit the bed but this is blatant bait. There hasn’t even been time to poll this, and those would be limited in value regardless.

Again, terrible performance. But this headline is nonsense.