!leftymemes@lemmy.dbzer0.com moderator @Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com removed my comment

or primaries

a spoiler effect happens when a losing candidate affects the results of an election simply by participating

Vote splitting is the most common cause of spoiler effects in FPP. In these systems, the presence of many ideologically-similar candidates causes their vote total to be split between them, placing these candidates at a disadvantage. This is most visible in elections where a minor candidate draws votes away from a major candidate with similar politics, thereby causing a strong opponent of both to win.

This willful ignorance of the spoiler effect is tiresome denialism of mathematics. We’ve already seen the consequences.

reminding that primaries exist & quoting wikipedia’s explanation that in the US’s voting system, voting for minor candidates spoils the election in favor of the major party candidate the voter opposes most. In context

the post is titled

Vote Blue No Matter Who

with my comment responding to the parent comment, which practically denies the point the higher comment is driving at that not “voting blue” can only spoil the election in favor of “the fascists”. Ignoring the purpose of primaries, the parent comment suggested alternatives that still don’t “vote Blue”.

According to the modlog entry

Time	mod	Action
	mod	Removed Comment ![meme: bitches dont know bout my spoiler effect][bout] or primaries > a [spoiler effect][spoiler] happens when a losing candidate affects the results of an election simply by participating > Vote splitting is the most common cause of spoiler effects in FPP. In these systems, the presence of many ideologically-similar candidates causes their vote total to be split between them, placing these candidates at a disadvantage. This is most visible in elections where a minor candidate draws votes away from a major candidate with similar politics, **thereby causing a strong opponent of both to win**. This willful ignorance of the spoiler effect is tiresome denialism of mathematics. We’ve already seen the consequences. [bout]: https://i.imgflip.com/ab9g3o.jpg [spoiler]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoiler_effect by lmmarsano reason: Rule 3

the moderator claims this violates rule

3. No liberalism, (right-wing) revisionism or reactionaries.

That includes so called: Social Democracy, Democratic Socialism, Dengism, Market Socialism, Patriotic Socialism, National Bolshevism, Anarcho-Capitalism etc. . Anti-Socialist people and content have no place here, as well as the variety of “Marxist”-“Leninists” (read: Dengists) (actual ML’s are welcome as long as they agree to the rules and don’t just copy paste/larp about stuff from a hundred years ago).

Somehow, straightforward social choice theory (a branch of mathematical social science) is “liberalism”, “revisionism”, or “reactionary”. Is “1 + 1 = 2” equally problematic?

Maybe moderators shouldn’t claim mathematics is ideology.