Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected] or [email protected]
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
This is inherently anti-democratic. Who decides who's qualified to vote? Is it you, with your infallible understanding of every issue?
Me? Aaaahahaha lol no. If I can't solve this problem I should also not be put in charge of what happens after the solution, ya know.
As for how to solve it: again, no idea. But that does not remove the fact that it's an actual problem. Another option would be to allow everyone to vote but weigh the votes on what differently, but I'm sure it's just about another flavour of the same intrinsic limitation. But it's defo not something "anti-democratic": for a system to actually represent and help people, it has to somehow prevent them from shoot their own legs off. If the system allows leg chopping, then those who already have an advantage due to more resources, more reach or more entrenched power, are going to have more, not less, of an advantage once legs start chopping.
Oops, replied to wrong comment.
Yes, we had this kind of logic before. https://allthatsinteresting.com/voting-literacy-test Turns out that "regulations" that restrict key democratic functions of societies are actually weaponized by tyrannical states against marginalized people.