Yeah it’s important for me because I have shit handwriting. I also draw zeroes with a bar in the middle because one of my college teachers used to subtract 1 point on tests for every zero with no bar.
We all hated that but tbh I’m glad I have that good practice ingrained in my brain now because I can’t accidentally mix up 0 and O
A: the system is able to elect candidates who win despite only getting a minority of the vote. This problem becomes worse the more parties participate.
B: in order to maximise the chance of an acceptable compromise taking office, very fringe groups must vote for a very mainstream party. Usually that leaves only two parties that make sense.
C: as these parties become the political space, voting for a specific interest can erode support for the nearest main party, guaranteeing a victory for the other main party.
Bonus: D: growing comfortable with their voter base, it is in parties’ interest to grow more radical.
In fact, without McCarthy and the Red Scare, I would find it strange that the American political scene has developed a nationalist “Republican” party and a moderately conservative “Democrat” party. Many more sane parliaments and governments develop their left to be a socialist or labour party.
So our choices in America are between conservative and slightly-less-conservative? So there’s a growing demand for a socialist party that doesn’t exist, but if it did exist it would lead to the domination of conservatives in politics?
Sounds like ranked choice voting would really help out with a lot of the issues that you presented. It’s too bad that the people who make our laws were voted in using the old system and changing that system in any way is a conflict of interest for them.
I guess things will only ever change if we force the issue.
It’s one of the reasons why I think America is institutionally fucked & rotten, that it’ll take the better part of two centuries to fix it, and that if instead we want stuff to be fixed within a generation, we may need a violent uprising.
Dioxygen difluorine (FOOF) is so reactive (unstable) it decays into O2 and F2 at about 4 % /day at -160 Celsius. It even reacts violently with ice.
Edit: Because everyone liked FOOF, get ready for tetraoxygen difluoride (FOOOOF) which is even more reactive. Apparently reacts explosively with elemental sulfur at -180 Celsius to form SF6.
If they curved the tick instead of some angled dash nonsense there would be no mistake. Thus an angled top on a 1, rather than curved, should be a punishable offense
I do, but dependent upon context. If there is no risk of confusion with a capital I or lower-case l (though I tend to write the latter with a slight rightward curve at the bottom), then yeah, it’s just a basic vertical line.
This is a thousand percent more than I thought I’d ever write about my penmanship. Welp.
My underlined 1s look like my 2s when I write with a marker. It’s a problem I didn’t antisipate that arose when I was trying to distinguish my 1s from my Is and ls.
this is a dashed seven thread. we don’t take kindly to straight-topped threes. double-bubble eights are also not “one of us”, nor are angle-ticked ones (if you’re gonna tick a one you better give that tick a curve). slashed and dotted zeroes are ok, but naked zeroes are heresy. overly-hooked 6s and 9s make us feel uncomfortable. triangled fours are the worst, though.
Exactly. This is why your stupid superfluous dashed sevens are heretical. Nobody should ever ask me if my 3 is a 7; what an absolutely absurd question.
Why would I put in the extra effort? How much time have I saved by not adding in that extra line in my 40+years of life?
How much more will I save in the next 40+ (less, of course, since computers will be the main source of 7s, whereas most of my 7s in the first 40 were in my youth before computers were commonplace, and I hope I don’t live that fucking long)?
I think the argument is that if you write a 1 with a line at the bottom it is easy to confuse it with a sloppily written 7, whose bar moved down a bit.
Which invalidates the argument of the user above. (If not inverse it - a lot more numbers in life start with a 1 than with a 7)
Me neither, but I also don’t read a lot of handwriting from other parts of the world. But I have heard that some places teach the 1 with a horizontal bar and the 7 without one.
Unless you have an actual need to write a lot of 7s in a row and then rush off and actually do something you otherwise wouldn’t have been able to accomplish had you omitted them, you can’t claim that as usefully saved time. The tiny fractions of time by themselves aren’t enough to do anything on their own therefore the total amount of things you have accomplished in your life would be the same whether you added the lines or not.
Below the text is a screengrab from the movie Pulp Fiction showing Jules Winnfield looking off to the right and saying “I don’t remember asking you a god damn thing”.
[I am a human, if I’ve made a mistake please let me know. Please consider providing alt-text for ease of use. Thank you. 💜 We have a community! If you wish for us to transcribe something, want to help improve ease of use here on Lemmy, or just want to hang out with us, join us at !lemmy_scribes!]
Yeah this meme is ass. If it makes anyone feel better, in Canada we have five parties that fail us instead of just two. The advantage there is we get to complain with more granularity. It’s the uncommon lose-lose-lose-lose-lose!
memes
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.