Most consumers don’t buy their own routers. The only time I’ve helped people buy routers in the last decade is to get one you could install a vpn on. Looking at the wireless standards never crossed our minds.

More like “hand-crafted” or “rustic” for a similar positive vibe.

I think we have a different understanding of ranked choice.

In your example, you have 3 candidates, and candidate 3 isn’t very popular. He isn’t many people’s first choice. At the end of round 1, candidate 1 has 45% of the first choice votes, candidate 2 has 46% of the first choice votes, and candidate 3 has 9% of the first choice votes. Candidate 3 is then eliminated, and those who voted for him have their votes go to their second choice candidate. That should leave either candidate 1 or 2 winning. The only way he wins is if he had more first choice votes than one of the other candidates.

If someone who is everyone’s second choice but no one’s first choice wins, that sounds like approval voting or something similar, not ranked choice.

Edit: Looking at the referenced election, it looks like he was the most popular among the people who didn’t want the 2 popular candidates. The first round was 8 candidates and a simple ballot. The second round was a runoff election with the 3 most popular candidates and a ranked choice ballot. He won the first round of that. No one had 50%, so instant runoff, but he also won the second round of that.

To avoid that situation, you would have had to change the run-off rules to only allow the 2 top people instead of the 3 top people. But it still was an in person run off that gave you the result you dislike.

You know the alternate name for ranked choice? Instant runoff.

In your opinion, why does making everyone come out a second time produce better results?

The thing is, placebos can actually be pretty effective. Hell, they’re effective even if you know they’re a placebo. And the more elaborate and similar to what you think would be involved in curing you, the more effective. So people going to chiropractors might actually be getting real results even if the things they’re doing are junk.

They’re the exact same mistake. Since the commenter you were responding to wasn’t the one to originally make the mistake, but instead was arguing with someone who’s premise relied on that mistake, it’s weird to only get on them about it.

The reason people go to “No relationship with reality” is because many people use the polls to say “will” instead of “favored” or conflate “will” and “favored.” When that’s the standard you are often presented, of course you are going to come to conclusion polling doesn’t have all that much to do with reality. Because it isn’t that predictive. Especially when you’re looking at things where we take this somewhat fuzzy number and turn it into a binary yes or no while the cloud of possibilities comfortably encompasses both outcomes.

So when talking to some making definitive statements about the outcome of an election based on polls, how they are using polls only has a tenuous relationship to reality.

This is a thread where someone made the statement “Trump would win if the election was today.” based on polls. You said yourself, that’s not what polls are for. Take it up with the person who is misusing the poll to make definitive statements like that rather than the person saying you can’t trust the polls for that.

Trail mix is usually nuts, some dried fruit like raisins or banana chips, and chocolate chips/m&ms or yogurt bites.

I couldn’t give it up. My baby bump group and parents of multiples group are too valuable a resource. The general parenting sub on lemmy isn’t active, much less such niche things. The main alternative to them is Facebook groups, which I’m even less inclined to deal with than reddit.

The list of exemptions is a mile long at this point: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-29/subtitle-B/chapter-V/subchapter-A/part-541?toc=1

Basically if you’re an office worker who makes more than than 34k/year, you’re probably exempt.

But if you truly believe in the religion, what does that change?

Like I can absolutely abhor some of the things people have done in the name of medicine and often are still doing, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to stop going to doctors when I’m sick. Because I fundamentally believe in medical science and that I’m more likely to die without them. If you are raised catholic, there’s a good chance you fundamentally believe your eternal life is better if you continue to follow the religion. Sure, I probably have more proof, but their belief is just as strong.

Periods going away or getting lighter is a side affect of hormonal IUDs. Copper IUDs have no mechanism to make them go away, and seem to pretty commonly make cramps and bleeding worse. .

Are you mad about people putting pronouns and tribal affiliations in their email signatures? Because, yeah, that’s fucking awful.

Yeah, he barely lost to Joe Biden. Biden vs Obama popularity isn’t even a contest.

It cuts both ways, though. Sure, it gets his fans out in record numbers, but it also gets people who hate him voting in record numbers, too. I don’t think we’d have had that 2020 turnout for Joe Biden without Trump.

And Trump is even more unlikable than Romney. No one has really been running terribly likeable candidates lately.

No. I’m pointing out that all the green countries aren’t equal. Like some allow gay marriage and some do not. Some allow legal discrimination against LGBT+ folks and some do not.

Mostly I was surprised to see Russia as green and had to look up why.

And this is just the legal status, as in, is it criminal to be in a homosexual relationship. Not do LGBT+ have rights, are there anti discrimination laws, are advocacy groups allowed. And certainly not how LGBT+ folks are treated in society.

It legalizes medical and research use of weed, which are currently federally illegal. Doesn’t do much for recreational use though.