this post was submitted on 20 May 2025
976 points (100.0% liked)

You Should Know

38548 readers
1357 users here now

YSK - for all the things that can make your life easier!

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must begin with YSK.

All posts must begin with YSK. If you're a Mastodon user, then include YSK after @youshouldknow. This is a community to share tips and tricks that will help you improve your life.



Rule 2- Your post body text must include the reason "Why" YSK:

**In your post's text body, you must include the reason "Why" YSK: It’s helpful for readability, and informs readers about the importance of the content. **



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding non-YSK posts.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-YSK posts using the [META] tag on your post title.



Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.

If you harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

If you are a member, sympathizer or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- The majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.

Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.



Rule 11- Posts must actually be true: Disiniformation, trolling, and being misleading will not be tolerated. Repeated or egregious attempts will earn you a ban. This also applies to filing reports: If you continually file false reports YOU WILL BE BANNED! We can see who reports what, and shenanigans will not be tolerated.

If you file a report, include what specific rule is being violated and how.



Partnered Communities:

You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.

Community Moderation

For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.

Credits

Our icon(masterpiece) was made by @clen15!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

RCV trends: Four states ban RCV in 2025, bringing the number of states with bans to 15.

(Okay idk why it says 15 up here then later says 16, somebody on that site probably didn't update the title text)

As of April 30, five states had banned RCV in 2025, which brought the total number of states that prohibit RCV to 16.

  • Gov. Mark Gordon (Republican) signed HB 165 on March 18.
  • West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey (Republican) signed SB 490 the March 19.
  • Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly (Democrat) signed SB 6 into law on April 1.
  • North Dakota Gov. Kelly Armstrong (Republican) signed HB 1297 on April 15.
  • Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders (Republican) signed HB 1706 which became law on April 17.

Six states banned RCV in 2024.

Why YSK: If you're a US-American, its time to pay attention to State and Local politics instead of solely on the Federal. There is a trend in conservative jurisdictions to stop progress in making elecoral systems more fair. Use this opportunity as a rallying-cry to pass Ranked-Choice Voting in progressive jurisdictions, and hopefully everyone else takes notes. Sometimes, all you need is a few states adopting a law to become the catalyst for it to become the model for the entire country, for better or for worse. Don't allow anti-RCV legislations to dominate, counter the propaganda with pro-RCV arguments. Time to turn the tide.

Edit: fixed formatting

Edit 2: Added in the map so you don't have to click the link:

See the pattern? πŸ€”

(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Approval and STAR are better anyway. Not that they wouldn't find a piss poor excuse to ban those as well.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

STAR? Sure.

Approval? Nah

Gonna copy paste my comment again:


I can see a bit of strategic voting happening.

Let me demonstrate:

For the sake of simplicity, let's say we have 3 candidates, and no term limits:

Trump, Biden, Sanders

Biden and Sander voters dispise trump, their preference in RCV is (example):

Biden>Sanders>Trump: 30%
Sander>Biden>Trump: 25%
Trump>Sanders>Biden: 23%
Trump>Biden>Sanders: 22%

Okay, so lets say they all approve their top 2:

Biden: 77%
Sanders: 78%
Trump: 45%

Okay we have president Sanders! Congrats, right?

Well, now the trumpers who approved sanders are like: "Hey wait a minute, we made our daddy lose because we approved Sanders"

All the trumpers now have a meeting and decided that next election, they don't approve Sanders or Biden as a strategic vote.

So now, Election 2 Results:

Biden: 55%
Sanders: 55%
Trump: 45%

Oh great, it's a tie. The law says that the election have to be re-done to solve the tie:

Now this next election, all people who preferred Sanders first go to a Sanders supporter meeting and started saying: "Lets disapprove Biden so Bernie can win!"

Simultaneously, Biden voters will be like: "Lets disapprove Sanders so Biden can win!"

Next election results:

Trump: 45%
Biden: 30%
Sanders 25%

Congrats, we have a glorified FPTP and spoiler effect yet again!

Now, other election systems could also have strategic voting, but its less likely with, for example, RCV, since you can rank candidates.


STAR voting is also acceptable, but its also less heard of, and as far as I know, it hasn't ever been done in a real-life election. I doubt that'll get popular any time soon, might as well find another easier to implement Non-FPTP system to rally behind.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago

It's mathematically proven that no voting system is perfect, so you'll have to choose what you value most in a voting system. There is no clear best system.

I think the arguments for approval voting are strong. It's simple and easy to understand, no need for complex multiple rounds of counting. Since you can't rank candidates it doesn't suffer from the spoiler effect.

In your hypothetical scenario you're forgetting the Trump voters who will vote for Sanders again after they see Biden nearly beating him. RCV has a bigger problem which is called the spoiler effect where, without strategical voting a loser can influence the election results. And am I missing something or should the numbers in your RCV list add up to 100%?

https://electionscience.org/education/approval-voting-vs-rcv

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It occurs to me that the electoral system might be used in Pres elections to work (very slightly) in that direction. What if a number of associated candidates made a pact that their electors, if elected, would vote for whichever of the pact makers got the most popular votes overall? Like if Sanders and Biden and Harris were in a pact like that of Democrats (named chosen of unlikely future candidates). People could vote for whichever, avoiding split-the-vote tactics. If Sanders won a state, but Harris got more pop votes nationwide, his electors would instead vote for her. Complicated maybe, but it wouldn't need any constitutional changes, and might make disasters like a Trump win less likely. Dumb idea?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago (7 children)

Really bugs me how americans talk about "ranked choice voting" because you guys seem to mean STV, which is a form of proportional representation with multi-member districts.

But in Canada, "ranked ballots" meant IRV, which was basically FPTP with a ranked ballot, and ironically exacerbated the worst parts of FPTP like the trend to a two party system.

Stick with the real names of electoral systems!

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

Love how it's the cousin fucking states and the flyover Midwest.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

We have rcv here for local elections in nyc but not for any state or federal elections

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

because the state and fed levels are corrupt as hell. the local level seemed more amenable, although i suspect the nyc mayoral elections will be thoroughly fiddled.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago

I hate it here in the South.

load more comments
view more: β€Ή prev next β€Ί