520
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2026
520 points (95.6% liked)
Mildly Infuriating
47131 readers
460 users here now
Home to all things "Mildly Infuriating" Not infuriating, not enraging. Mildly Infuriating. All posts should reflect that. Please post actually infuriating posts to !actually_infuriating@lemmy.world
I want my day mildly ruined, not completely ruined. Please remember to refrain from reposting old content. If you post a post from reddit it is good practice to include a link and credit the OP. I'm not about stealing content!
It's just good to get something in this website for casual viewing whilst refreshing original content is added overtime.
Rules:
1. Be Respectful
Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.
Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.
...
2. No Illegal Content
Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.
That means: -No promoting violence/threats against any individuals
-No CSA content or Revenge Porn
-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)
...
3. No Spam
Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.
-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.
-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.
-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers
-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.
...
4. No Porn/Explicit
Content
-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.
-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.
...
5. No Enciting Harassment,
Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts
-Do not Brigade other Communities
-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.
-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.
-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.
...
6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.
...
7. Content should match the theme of this community.
-Content should be Mildly infuriating. If your post better fits !Actually_Infuriating put it there.
-The Community !actuallyinfuriating has been born so that's where you should post the big stuff.
...
8. Reposting of Reddit content is permitted, but attribution is not required in any way. No links to Reddit in post body
-If you would like to provide a source link, do so in the comments but not in the post body.
...
...
Also check out:
Partnered Communities:
Reach out to LillianVS for inclusion on the sidebar.
All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Reforms that are needed:
I'm sure there are more, but this is just off the top of my head.
I'd go with term limits as well. Too many people in what are essentially life terms
Plenty of countries have laws that fine or otherwise punish people that do not vote, afaik this doesn't tend to lead to better functioning democracies. I think this is a thing where the carrot works better than the stick.
The standard method of ranked choice voting: E gets eliminated as they have the least, everyone who voted for them goes to their next ranked choice. Repeat until one person has over 50%.
Please forgive any ignorance on my part, but would it be required that we'd know what the 2nd (and 3rd and 4th and so on) preferences of those who voted for E in the first choice?
If so, and if such could be done, what if of those who voted for E on their first choice, in their second preference, half of them (i.e. half of 10% being 5%) voted for C, a third of them voted for B, and a sixth of them voted for A;
meanwhile two-thirds of those who voted in their first preference for A, half of those who voted in their first preference for B, and a third of those who voted in their first preference for C, voted for D in their 2nd preference? —i.e. (⅔ x 26%) + (½ x 25%) + (⅓ x 24%) = 16⅔% + 12½% + 8% = 36⅚%.
Yes. Please look up "How ranked choice voting works" instead of asking randos on social media to explain it to you. The information is readily available.
wp:Ranked voting
(my bold)
...
Glad you were able to find the answers on your own for the potential options.
Seeing as Lemmy is not in charge of implementing it I didn't see the point of having Randos argue over which specific version of ranked choice voting to use, as I'm sure we can all agree that any version is better than what is currently being used.
I didn't find "the answers" just some info about it.
I'm not so sure of that. Please be more specific in the type ranked choice voting system you'd favor.
I suppose I rather half a parliament (or similar) be decided by proportional representation, and in the others, perhaps it's a run-off if the winner of a plurality doesn't get a majority.
The one you suggested I suppose is okay too. 😁 🙂
also
Here's a brief explanation of how preferential voting works in Australia: https://www.chickennation.com/voting/