volkris @volkris@qoto.org

@falken @bibliolater @QOTO

The status pages from a few hours ago mentioned that they were debugging some of their customizations.

Sounds like the main system was able to come back up but they still had some tweaks to do.

@breedlov I don't think that was a mainstream reaction.

I was interested to see what Trump supporter said about the debate, and they pretty much celebrated what they saw as Vance coming out way ahead with the CBS misstep being just a side note, sort of saying it's what they expected from a biased media.

They certainly didn't erupt in fury over it. They were too busy celebrating.

@europesays thing is, if Biden responded well to the event he would score points over it.

@dcdeejay well, it's kind of a no harm, no foul position.

It's not f**k everybody else since anyone not willing to play the game would still be entitled to complain if they're defrauded.

The problem with their proposal is that it's reactive and not proactive. In theory it's not so bad, but in practice there are very good reasons that the state decided not to go that way.

@MaRY1Fem you're falling into the trap that so many fall into where you're getting the cause and effect backwards.

Trump doesn't cause these social issues. The social issues case Trump. They're the symptom, not the cause.

The best evidence of this is following mainstream conservative media where their ideas often predate Trump expressing them by days or weeks.

Trump didn't cause chaos. The chaos caused Trump.

@Nonilex that description is at odds with the Court's actual rulings, though.

Far from asserting dominance and making it harder for Congress to govern, the Court has ruled with restraint, citing its being bound by law, and reinforced Congress's role in passing laws.

Yes, it's the job of the SG to push for greater power for the president, but it's the job of the other two branches to check that power.

VF seems to not really understand fundamental matters of US civics here.

@QOTO I take it it succeeded?

@charvaka but that's not what happened. In fact, it kind of begs the question.

It wasn't an issue of throwing out legally cast ballots but rather determining what ballots were legally cast in the first place. It was disputed whether the ballots were legal.

@Greguti you say that, and yet there are quite a few people pointing out that the chronological feed doesn't get them the content they want to see.

In reality, chronological feed IS an algorithm, just a very simplistic and untailored one. We don't escape algorithms that way.

So we need better algorithms that give users more control over their experiences.

@waysideollie No, McConnell didn't change the rules. The Senate Majority Leader doesn't have that authority.

Instead, a majority of senators called for the rule change in response to Democrats' own rule changes.

That story is misleading, not reflecting the history of the Senate in important ways involving holding our congresspeople democratically accountable.

@rberger what in the world? We have the history to show us that the guy has a record of being against them.

A vote for Trump is a vote for an idiot, but that's all we have to work with this time around, two idiots, but it's definitely not a vote for Putin and Un. It comes across as gaslighting to say otherwise because we saw for ourselves what happened on the record.

I wouldn't vote for the guy, but I'm not buying that story.

@Nonilex but that's not how the Supreme Court works.

So you're basically promoting a conspiracy theory here that just doesn't match the real world.

@libramoon Yes. Exactly. It's not true.

The public record shows that it's not true.

So you put your finger on it there.

@libramoon it's not though.

Because anyone who knows how the Supreme Court works would know that these claims just aren't true. It's real simple. So if you are interested in spreading these silly stories, well that directly speaks to not understanding how the court works.

It's like how people spreading flat Earth stories don't understand how astronomy works or how people spreading vaccine disinformation don't understand how biology works. If you're spreading the silly stories, then you don't understand how it works.

@DoomsdaysCW oh I've seen plenty of that nonsense.

It would be laughable if it wasn't so sad that so many people buy into it when the Supreme Court rulings are right there in the public record for anybody to read for themselves, which is the whole point of them being public, which would quickly debunk all of those nutty conspiracy theories.

@dougiec3 well no.

Roe v Wade has been unsettled pretty much since it was drafted, with Casey being just the best example to show that.

So no, it's not the Thomas Court and it didn't scrap settled law. That whole story is just wrong on the facts.

@QueenValhalla@mastodon.world That's not how the ruling came down.

@DoomsdaysCW That's a nice conspiracy theory you've got there.

@kgw because it's a dumb claim that isn't really supported by the record, as the Supreme Court publishes its opinions that have not only diverse vote counts but also, and more importantly, stated reasoning that is not based on partisanship.

It's not more of an election issue because anyone who is informed knows that it's basically a conspiracy theory, basically just sensationalized nonsense to say that the court is plagued by partisan bias.

It's not an election issue because so many of us are better informed.

@janisf if you have solid evidence of election fraud, please do provide it.

We've had, what, a decade now of people making such claims without being able to make such a case.

But maybe you have the evidence that's been missing.