![](https://midwest.social/pictrs/image/678c4138-8226-464f-9087-49addc2b430b.jpeg)
If we had Approval Voting people would be able to vote for third party candidates independent of what they do concerning major party candidates. And, their support would always be shown in the final tally on election day.
If we had Approval Voting people would be able to vote for third party candidates independent of what they do concerning major party candidates. And, their support would always be shown in the final tally on election day.
They’re finally getting rid of these guys because they’re old and no one wants to take care of them. That’s all.
I mean, yeah, 1000 people is enough assuming there’s no sampling bias. But if you’ve got sampling bias, increasing the sampling size won’t actually help you. The issue you’re talking about is unrelated to how many people you talk to.
Your own suggestion of splitting up the respondents by state would itself introduce sampling bias, way over sampling low population states and way under sampling high population states. The survey was interested in the opinions of the nation as a whole, so arbitrary binning by states would be a big mistake. You want your sampling procedure to have equal change of returning a response from any random person in the nation. With a sample size of 1000, you’re not going to have much random-induced bias for one location or another, aside from population density, which is fine because the survey is about USA people and not people in sub-USA locations.
Ah. I personally wouldn’t care, then. In fact, I would be honored in this situation l. But, I’m sure there are those that would feel differently.
A degree should have no sensitivity towards anything outside of the classroom. Did you pass all the classes you needed to? You get your degree. Full stop.
I mean, just break up the massive corporations. Capitalism requires seller competition in the marketplace in order to provide an incentive to drive down prices. If there are too few players, they can easily make unspoken agreements to fuck over consumers.
I very much wouldn’t. I’m not interested in the kinds of things a young trophy wife is going to offer. I think being a rich megastar would be bad for my dating game, because it would attract all the wrong people.
The way statistical sampling works, 1000 people in a population of 300,000,000 is actually good enough for most things. You can play around with numbers here to convince yourself, but at 95% confidence 1000 people will give an answer to within 3% of the true answer for the 300,000,000 population.
Suddenly trying to convince all my friends and family I’m from France.
YMYDYMYD
Lol, I’m sorry you’re getting downvoted for speculating about improving weights and measures in a thread about wanting better weights and measures.
I kinda thought the title made it clear I was an American.
DST is good actually. Fite me.
A million percent AI.
Sure, but don’t make promises if you’re not gonna keep them. I’m all for nonproliferation, and I see the failure to help defend Ukraine to be a big problem in when convincing other countries they don’t need nukes.
This is what happens when you promise you’d protect a country if they gave up their nukes, and then you don’t protect that country when they get invaded.
Hells yeah! A reminder to everyone: progress takes a lot of slow and hard work. They want you to give up. Start a fight and keep it up!
What is it about role-playing that’s strictly masculine? Like, why does the group have to be gendered?
I just fucking tried to look up cholegolasterol.
I think the amazing thing is how much improvement you get from going from “choose one” to “choose all you like.” (AKA approval voting). The ultimate goal is proportional representation, but approval is such an easy first step.