I have to wonder why I haven’t seen any post from you describing alternative voting methods or how to take action on getting them accepted.
Voting for a third-party candidate, who will lose and cannot affect policy, is not a way to do this - especially someone who has been as absolutely ineffectual and unsuccessful as Jill Stein.
also, imagine that you went to, let’s say a software engineering meet up, and talked to people about your idea for an implementation strategy, and people came out of the woodwork to tell you it was a bad idea and you would lose data. Would you listen to the advice and consider that you may not have had as broad perspective as you think or may have missed something in your reasoning, or would you double down over and over again?
I have to wonder why I haven’t seen any post from you describing alternative voting methods or how to take action on getting them accepted.
It’s not my job. Why don’t you do that? Go post some stuff describing alternative voting methods.
Voting for a third-party candidate, who will lose and cannot affect policy, is not a way to do this - especially someone who has been as absolutely ineffectual and unsuccessful as Jill Stein.
I’m not voting for Jill Stein. I like her, but I am not voting for her.
Would you listen to the advice and consider that you may not have had as broad perspective as you think or may have missed something in your reasoning, or would you double down over and over again?
I posted an article that’s already widely available on a much bigger platform than Lemmy. I didn’t write it or create the content. It’s already out there for anyone and everyone to see–all I did was share it here for discussion. If you disagree with the article itself, that’s fine, but calling for it to be censored or accusing me of pushing an agenda simply because it’s not what you want to read seems misguided. Open debate requires different perspectives, not shutting down content you don’t like.
I have to wonder why I haven’t seen any post from you describing alternative voting methods or how to take action on getting them accepted.
Voting for a third-party candidate, who will lose and cannot affect policy, is not a way to do this - especially someone who has been as absolutely ineffectual and unsuccessful as Jill Stein.
also, imagine that you went to, let’s say a software engineering meet up, and talked to people about your idea for an implementation strategy, and people came out of the woodwork to tell you it was a bad idea and you would lose data. Would you listen to the advice and consider that you may not have had as broad perspective as you think or may have missed something in your reasoning, or would you double down over and over again?
It’s not my job. Why don’t you do that? Go post some stuff describing alternative voting methods.
I’m not voting for Jill Stein. I like her, but I am not voting for her.
I posted an article that’s already widely available on a much bigger platform than Lemmy. I didn’t write it or create the content. It’s already out there for anyone and everyone to see–all I did was share it here for discussion. If you disagree with the article itself, that’s fine, but calling for it to be censored or accusing me of pushing an agenda simply because it’s not what you want to read seems misguided. Open debate requires different perspectives, not shutting down content you don’t like.