He seems to think like a mathematician or philosopher and enjoyed considering each of those items separately, in isolation from one another - plus as a YouTuber, he needs to release moar content, moar often, so multiple videos helps him maintain his existence that way as opposed to a single, larger video, especially on a complex topic that since it is >1 minute long, the vast majority of people are not going to watch anyway.:-P

But anyway, if he’s already mathematically proved certain things about e.g. ranked-choice, and how it differs from whatever else, then why should he bother going further into the weeds, that the vast majority of people don’t care the tiniest bit about? After all, a look at basically every election ever, especially recently, reveals that the common people know next to nothing about how the system works. e.g. people voting against Hillary Clinton in 2016, either by voting 3rd party, or switching to the “Never Hillary” movement to actively vote for Trump, but then being shocked - shocked I tell you! SHOOKETH! - when he won. So if we can’t figure out that 1+1=2, then differential calculus, much less simple algebra, is going to be beyond us (collectively) as well.

So, I took it as not that he refused to consider those other possibilities, just that he was focusing his description to explain one thing in isolation of other concepts, as much as possible at least. e.g. regardless of whether he should have been talking about (or naming it as) FPTP, that’s what he was aiming to do, so that’s what he did.

About the Rules for Rulers I think similarly as above but also: the “rulers” there aren’t necessarily the ones in charge, as is true for the monarchies & totalitarian regimes, but rather the “voters” who put those people in charge. In that formulation, why should the non-voters (e.g. literal children, people who are mentally disabled, etc.) have power over & above that of the voters, i.e. the responsible “rulers”?

Although that is exactly what always ends up happening… eventually, in any such system. Imagine a person who votes, individually, but then also is responsible for gerrymandering a district of lets say a million people. So they should have had power equal to 1/1000000, though instead they overturned the decisions of those million people and single-handedly altered the election, FAR in excess of their individual voting power. They cannot overturn the collective weight of a full million voters all speaking with a single unified voice… but they could make a vote for e.g. 1/10th vs. 9/10ths end up with the former rather than the latter being in charge, which is pretty damn powerful (it doesn’t have to be “perfect”, it just has to work - possibly in conjunction with other things like removing certain classes of people as voters). So here, irl rather than in pure theory in isolation of irl considerations, “rulers” end up NOT being the voters, but rather those in charge b/c they are willing to cheat the system, to keep themselves in charge or at least others exactly like them, using non-voting schemes. i.e. it is the True Rulers™ who are “in charge” rather than the voting ones, who were put into place by non-voting systems, so the entire system gets turned upon its head and does if not 100% then still effectively the opposite of what it was originally intended to - that is, it ignores/overturns votes rather than uses them to determine the outcomes of elections.

So if we, the aspiring rulers i.e. voters, wish to actually rule, then we need to know what we are up against. And if others cheat… well then that does not mean that we have to as well, but we should at least be aware that that is what is going on!?! To some degree at least, even if not 100%, hence it is “biased” and “unfair” and “rigged”. That is what I took from those videos, collectively.

An aspect he completely ignores in favour of spreadsheet thinking.

That’s bc he explains each concept mostly in isolation of others, leaving other concepts for separate videos themselves. But in e.g. Rules for Rulers, he very much discusses power dynamics. And I thought he had another one - in addition to the more mathematical one - illustrating FPTP using the animal kingdom, where technically people might assume one thing to be true, but based on power dynamics in practice it never is.

So watch Rules for Rulers yet if you haven’t - it may change literally everything about your understanding, as it did mine.

Edit - references:

1. FPTP explanained mathematically

2. gerrymandering explained separately

3. rules for Rulers, outlining necessary considerations involved with any path forward - i.e. it works against anyone and especially those who ignore this principle

Especially if you ram that not-door long, hard, deep, and strong enough, really get up in there and penetrate that wall. If you run out of steam you could even switch to an electric appliance, but in that case be gentle (though not too gentle…).

Um… I’m not sure where this is going, and at this point I’m afraid to continue? 😔

Oh that’s no accident, nor do your words go far enough, unfortunately, bc they are doing stuff now that actually was fully illegal, back when the US government was more functional and pursued antitrust laws against Microsoft. :-(

I meant like a daily usage situation - e.g. working from a terminal, running MacVim, and things like Firefox and Slack etc. all work fine from a Mac - but I don’t self-host, and I run actual Mac OSX itself, so my answers may be of limited utility to you.

If someone else is reading this I would look into running a Jellfin server from a machine running Linux, which can be connected to from a device running iOS or Android or whatever they want - but your kodi+mpd already sounds like it should do the trick.

Hopefully you can avoid running Mac OSX itself, but if that’s not possible then perhaps at worst you could get a machine that does that and then partially isolate it on the network? (though that is beyond my skillset:-)

For TV I just an ancient ChromeCast (iirc it’s a first-generation even!) and that works from everything (ironically one of the harder solutions was from Samsung mobile, though even ancient iPads have apps that will make it happen). I worry about when my TV and especially the ChromeCast dies what will I do - it will take so much time to investigate a replacement, it seems all/most of the newer solutions are trying to inject ads or whatever into the stream, or even just not working as simply as the old. Mine is security through obscurity, which only works for so long until the hardware flat wears out:-).

And I barely have a backup solution - just a single SSD that I put stuff onto when I think about it, and is aging so when it too wears out… I have so much catching up that I need to do, I’m setting myself up for pain most likely:-(. But also I tend to “stream” most things rather than “download”, so my need for thus is extremely much smaller.

And soon memory issues as well.

I got 99 problems but Meta’s Threads ain’t one of those.

Oh yuck. I also switched away - half Linux, two-thirds Mac (hehe, all fun:-) - but not everyone can manage that.

Many people want that, but can’t bc of their jobs.:-(

I haven’t either… bc I’ve been privileged to not have to work with Satan Windows for almost a decade now.:-)

Yes your variable names should indeed all be different from one another.

var Turtle1 var Turtle1 var Turtle1

just doesn’t quite have the same impact:-).

I assure you that could look up the definitions of those words, if you were so inclined. Also, your comment was somehow a lot shorter when I replied, compared to now (e.g. why would I claim to have inferred that your position was subjective, if you came right out and said it, which at least now it looks as if you did?). I can’t keep up with you if you are going to edit the past like that.

For the sake of future conversations, you might consider (1) waiting to reply until you have written out all that you want to say, (2) keeping your edits to a minimum, for clarity’s sake, and (3) if you must edit - which we all do, all the time - then at least clearly denote which things are edits, so as to distinguish them from the original text. Edit: this is not an actual edit, but this would be one way that I could use to denote that I am adding a sentence to an existing paragraph, rather than leave people to see that something is different but then have to guess what it might be.

Otherwise… pure chaos ensues. e.g. I could say “you are a poopy-face”, you then you reply “no I am not, but you are”, and then I edit my first to say “wow, you are so smart!”… (haha, checkmate!) do you see how this leads to disingenuous exchanges, rather than logical, rational, reasoned discourse, among people trying to talk in good faith?

Anyway, yes Nazis were (and are still) bad, imho, but feel free to do you I guess - so long as you aren’t forcing me to do the same. But let’s end it here, b/c you have so far not managed to explain how any of this at all relates to the OP, and I am already too put off by this style. Hopefully we can enjoy better exchanges in the future:-).

From your question, I can infer that you - even if only for the sake of argument - are taking the position that it is subjective? In which case, feel free to do so - but don’t be surprised if not everyone picks the same definition.

There is definitely room for nuance, but I tried to pick an example that was fairly clear & unambiguous according to most people’s understanding of that term.

Words are one type of action - like if someone refuses to say something, that’s a choice right there. e.g., I’ll say it: “Nazis murdering people is bad”, but there are some who won’t say those words… and that’s really saying something (managing to convey a message of a whole other sort).

Words are cheaper than most other types of actions though. Yet also they can amass in bulk, and there are ways to follow through e.g. if someone says they fixed something in a piece of code, and provide a GitHub link, you can verify that the words match the deeds.

Edit: also I find it hilariously ironic to see these early downvotes, essentially judging these words without even offering an explanation, so perhaps we should say that while actions are more weighty than words, votes (up and down) are the cheapest of all 😂.

That’s all very well and good and all, until it meets another worm and wants to talk. Perhaps one of the opposite gender…

Most things on the Fediverse are limited by someone willing to put in the effort to make them happen. Create it, populate it with memes, and it will exist. People will still post to the larger communities though, bc they are more well-known.

In Peanuts, all adults would sound like “wah wah, wha wah wha wah wha wah”, to which the children would respond as if they made perfect sense.

Then again, I prefer thinking about your second possibility so I’m going with that one:-).

The effectiveness of the shitheadiness is a separate matter from its identity:-). If someone were to say downvote literally everything you ever did, within seconds of you doing it, and regardless of content, then that would be a shitty thing to do.

Ah, mods only, and then only for their own communities - well, still, that’s something (though I’d prefer prefer it opened up for everyone). Thanks for the link.

Being able to see the moderation history linked directly to a post was added then - but I don’t see vote viewing nor recall hearing about it, which would have been a huge deal.