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?

And more expensive than flying a good chunk of the time!

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.

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.

Primary to tertiary? Does that mean it includes what college students through grad school spend themselves? Because that would shift perception of this a lot.

Edit: The original data does include public funding and private funding:

Every year, governments, private companies, students and their families make decisions about the financial resources invested in education.

They do break it out, but I can’t tell if the graphic is using the total or just the public funding.

So this graphic might just be: Americans spend a stupid amount on college.

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. .

If he was hospitalized for the influenza, getting MRSA while there isn’t all that surprising.

On my phone if I hold down on the suggested word in the keyboard area, I can delete it from “learned words.” This is only really helpful if it’s a typo that isn’t also a real word.

Canadians as a dogwhistle for what, dare I ask? Or was that part of what you refused to ask?

That other countries do it doesn’t make it not horrifying. Almost all your examples are horrifying.

Only the last one isn’t. Being held pending trial if you threaten to flee the country? That makes sense.

In California, that actually sounds extremely useful.

I was so curious how boolean logic was about to play into things haha

At&t lost a bunch of people’s SSNs

Why do they even have SSNs to lose?

To check for terrorism

(Also/but) that doesn’t mean they need to store it.

Be honest. Which word actually makes sense?

“Also” doesn’t make sense in context.

I think this miscommunication is more on you for taking it as an attack towards yourself when it was pretty clearly suspicious towards at&t, not you. In the future, I suggest trying to read things as charitably as possible. It will make forums a much more pleasant place if you don’t immediately assume aggression based on pretty innocuous words.

You know what the plan to store a lot of nuclear waste in America is? Bury it in west nowhere, Texas.

But if he wasn’t capable of saving himself?

If we’re talking about home desktop users (I’m including laptops, but not phones/tablets), I think that number is on the decline. 10-20 years ago, you generally needed a computer to function. Now, I use my desktop for some games and to do taxes. And last year, I actually did taxes on my phone (I had newborn twins so sitting down at a computer for any meaningful amount of time was not happening). It was a little bit of a pain, but totally do-able. My mom didn’t bother getting another desktop after hers died a year ago.

Mobile devices usually don’t encourage tech savviness and it seems to be the direction most personal use of computers is going.