So just don't make it that way.

But undervoting isn't really a problem. No one is being disenfranchised by not casting a second vote (or ranking all options), they just aren't availing themselves of the full range of options. Even just voting for one person could be an intentional choice if you don't really care about the other options or want your first choice to have a better chance of winning an expected head-to-head.

This is at worst an indicator the government should run some informational campaigns, not a reason not to use multi-voting systems.

Yeah, the article says they increased pay and still weren't getting enough drivers. So... do it again. You've already know the knob you need to turn to resolve your problems, you just don't want to turn it any further. Especially not when you can throw money at what seems like corruption (incompetent consultants) instead.

Apart from the "why do you need it" question, the beach is specifically a place people often leave items that can't be taken in the water unattended. Sure, legislators can write laws about how a gun must not be left unattended and gun nuts can swear up and down about how they would never do that, but they will. No matter how much you think "there's a lot of people around" or "I'll just be in and out" or "I'll watch my stuff from the water", thefts happen, and now a mundane occurrence has turned a supposedly (not really) "safe" and "legal" gun into one of those dangerous "illegal" guns they can't be held responsible for.

We were perfectly happy with our gun laws, and they worked, and now fringe nutcases and a politically captured courts are telling us we can't implement common sense restrictions because the nuts have a panic attack if they're not constantly armed.

For a lot of people "unpaid time off" isn't a favor. You're asking them to pay to vote.

Plus the rules frequently only come into play if their work shift makes it literally impossible to make it to the polls. If they could wake up from their third shift job to get in line as polls open before making it to their other job at 7:45 sharp, then no time off for you. If you need to get your kids to school during that time slot? Too bad, that's time you could technically be voting, so it's not your employer's responsibility.

You can't exclude your way to having a representative jury. If the opposing side strikes all/most of the black people, none of your strike choices can make the jury more black.

Why Is It So Easy for Prosecutors to Strike Black Jurors?

There are no comprehensive statistics on how often prosecutors strike jurors based on race, but there is little doubt that the practice remains common, especially in the South. In Caddo Parish, Louisiana, prosecutors struck forty-eight per cent of qualified black jurors between 1997 and 2009 and only fourteen per cent of qualified whites, according to a review by the Louisiana Capital Assistance Center. In Jefferson Parish, where a quarter of the population is black, the split was even greater—fifty-five per cent to sixteen per cent—so that twenty-two per cent of felony trials between 1994 and 2002 had no black jurors.

I read the statement that was linked here, and it just seemed like they were saying that they should be respectful and follow our rules?

Read through some of the first set of links if you haven't. The same admin who's trying to gently suggest they don't troll is talking about how their instance won't brigade lemmygrad because the energy is better focused on the wider war against liberalism in the fediverse. It calls into question exactly how real that suggestion is vs. just a pro-forma attempt to head off this exact result with a toothless suggestion they know no one is going to follow.

I think their admins are doing an honest job trying to put out reminders for good behavior (**edit: I hadn't originally followed the links to the admin's comments elsewhere, I no longer think they're doing an honest job), the problem is that the sub they grew from never heeded similar admonishments and their federation post explicitly says they will not be moderated for activity outside of hexbear, so it's really just a suggestion, not a rule.

I don't agree with anti-western ideology being a good reason for defederation, but I do expect hexbear to be a major source of trolling from past experience with r/CTH. Reddit post-Donald and post-CTH bans was a noticeably less trolly (NOT saying they're even remotely equivalent, just both were sources of trolling and were banned at the same time).

I don't really mind lemmygrad users. They're often pretty tankie, but I don't see much trolling from them. They state their opinion about China/Russia and frequently get downvoted, but I haven't seen them explicitly try to be disruptive to communities/people they don't like.

Conservatives believe it’s vulnerable to a legal challenge, and some say it’s just a matter of finding a plaintiff with the legal right — or standing — to sue.

The plaintiff in the other case didn't have standing either, so why would they need it this time. The court is beyond simple hurdles like "precedent" or "standing".

People seem to just be assuming the gun control comments were an insurmountable anchor around his neck, but after Uvalde polling put him just down 4 points (43-47) for trust on gun issues. There's a lot more wiggle room in the gun debate, even in Texas, than people think.

I'm not real sure how much the Threads Algorithm is going to pass through Mastodon content (and even less sure if it will even be able to pass through Lemmy content). I think the much more valuable aspect is you can pitch your Threads friends that they can move to the Fediverse and actually get to choose what content they see rather than which influencers paid Meta to fill up your feed.