|
Don Gato posted:the Presidents thread has a bunch of interesting stories of the stories behind how many presidents got elected. Before the primary system, sometimes they'd literally get chosen because there were two popular candidates and candidate number 3 didn't have any enemies. Yeah John Quincy Adams became president despite losing both the popular and electoral votes, because it was a 4 way election and the winner (Andrew Jackson) had a plurality, not a majority, which meant that it went to the weird rules rather than just giving it to him. I think that technically that can still happen according to the rules. It's just that the practical chance of a close race between more than two candidates in the modern US is slim to none because of how dominant the two major parties have become at all levels of politics.
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2018 05:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 01:57 |
|
|
Mcmuffin's strategy in 2016 was to try to spoil Trump's majority into a plurality, then get picked by the legislators as a less-awful choice.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2018 06:16
|
|
|
AKA Pseudonym posted:I think most states require you to pick a party (or just go independent) at the time you register regardless of whether you intend to vote in a primary or not. Over 30, yeah. My understanding is that the remainder require you to declare a party when you go to a primary (valid only for that primary, but you only get to pull e.g. a Democratic, Republican, etc. primary ballot).
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2018 17:07
|
|
|
Closed primaries are also so that people can’t sabotage opposing primaries (and still get to vote in their favored one, at least). You still see this where campaigns will fund spoiler candidates in secret to try and divide their opponents’ votes in the primary This is all still an artifact of First Past the Post and would be greatly helped by Single Transferable Vote, but we’re not allowed to have nice things so...
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2018 17:33
|
|
|
Tunicate posted:Mcmuffin's strategy in 2016 was to try to spoil Trump's majority into a plurality, then get picked by the legislators as a less-awful choice. I'm pretty sure McMullin was actually trying to throw the election to Hillary, figuring it was better for the Republican party in the long term.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2018 17:46
|
|
|
DarkHorse posted:Closed primaries are also so that people can’t sabotage opposing primaries (and still get to vote in their favored one, at least). You still see this where campaigns will fund spoiler candidates in secret to try and divide their opponents’ votes in the primary Of course, you could be like other countries and just, not have primaries 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2018 18:27
|
|
|
Megillah Gorilla posted:Of course, you could be like other countries and just, not have primaries Yes, I totally want the candidate to represent me to be chosen by the Speaker of the House / Minority Leader. AKA Pseudonym posted:It might be worth noting here that primaries are a relatively recent invention. Up until the 70s nominees were selected by convention delegates which gave party big shots a lot of control. After the 1968 Democratic convention turned into a giant shitshow states started instituting systems to popularly elect pledged delegates. As stupid as they can be they're actually a step forward.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2018 18:36
|
|
|
Megillah Gorilla posted:Of course, you could be like other countries and just, not have primaries Can you give an example? A general rule of fairness in election systems is that duplicates of a candidate shouldn't hurt the candidate., For example, if we were running an election on where to eat: Steak Shack Veganmania Adding copies of one choice shouldn't decimate its chances for winning. Steak Shack Veganmania on 1st street Veganmania on 8th street Veganmania down by the wharf Veganmaina at the college Edit: Actually, if people want to talk about this, do you all want to take it to a new thread? Dr. Arbitrary has a new favorite as of 18:42 on Sep 14, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2018 18:38
|
|
|
I'd love to follow a thread about voting systems and the theory and math behind them. Link us if you make one
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2018 18:46
|
|
|
Son of Thunderbeast posted:I'd love to follow a thread about voting systems and the theory and math behind them. Link us if you make one
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2018 19:11
|
|
|
Colour me interested too. Also, from the MLB thread by way of the NBA and NFL threads:  That atmospheric pressure cheat code. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2018 19:14
|
|
|
TinTower posted:Colour me interested too. I'm not sorry, I couldn't resist
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2018 19:37
|
|
|
What I wanna know is why the sports are in that order.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2018 19:48
|
|
|
It's alphabetical by league abbreviation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2018 19:57
|
|
|
Interesting how it has so much more influence on an "inside" sport like basketball.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2018 20:18
|
|
|
DACK FAYDEN posted:ah yes, the atmospheric pressure in home of the #2 most favored NFL team *squints* Foxborough, Massachusetts Like the Broncos, they're actually helped by lower pressures. LostCosmonaut has a new favorite as of 21:24 on Sep 14, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2018 21:18
|
|
|
frankenfreak posted:Interesting how it has so much more influence on an "inside" sport like basketball. It could just be that the team gets so used to the particular quirks of the court that even if it's all within regulation, you're still going to have floorboards with maybe slightly different springiness or grip to them, or other tiny things that you'd get used to if you practiced there all the time but might throw you off a bit if you're used to a different feeling. Especially considering that compared to an outside sport, the play area itself probably doesn't change nearly so much, physically, so there's more time to get used to it. Like on a football field the dirt gets all churned up and the grass changes over time and so on. A basketball court might get the occasional re-waxing but barring some kind of accidental damage it's not really going to see to much variation over time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2018 02:33
|
|
|
The air pressure indoors is basically the same as the air pressure outdoors. But there's a difference in how much aerobic exercise, like running, is involved in playing the sport, and thus how much breathing is involved, and thus how much it's impacted by being acclimated to lower air pressure.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2018 03:19
|
|
|
Freakonomics actually looked into the home field advantage, the TL;DR is that the home field advantage is largely because the judge is friendlier to the home team because their fans are louder.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2018 06:26
|
|
|
Bongo Bill posted:The air pressure indoors is basically the same as the air pressure outdoors. But there's a difference in how much aerobic exercise, like running, is involved in playing the sport, and thus how much breathing is involved, and thus how much it's impacted by being acclimated to lower air pressure.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2018 07:21
|
|
|
klafbang posted:Freakonomics actually looked into the home field advantage, the TL;DR is that the home field advantage is largely because the judge is friendlier to the home team because their fans are louder. the thing about freakonomics is that its 100% correlation without causation. they just posit some coincidence and say "wow, think about it, makes sense right?" sure, or the judge is hostile to the away team. who knows? definitely not the freakonomicists
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2018 08:35
|
|
|
Krankenstyle posted:the thing about freakonomics is that its 100% correlation without causation. they just posit some coincidence and say "wow, think about it, makes sense right?" sure, or the judge is hostile to the away team. who knows? definitely not the freakonomicists The fact that the graph breaks it down by sport and there's a pretty clear difference between sports might help to prove or disprove some of those conjectures. Like how much impact does the referee have in each sport (or I guess umpire for baseball), vs. how much leeway they're given when making judgement calls? If the sports where the ref has the most impact and freedom show the lowest home team advantage, then you can immediately throw that out as a potential reason. Although granted the graph itself also raises a lot of questions, like how do they measure an "equal caliber" opponent. Like sure you can look at stats and compare teams that have roughly equal win/loss ratios but often you get a team that's just so far ahead of the league that no meaningful comparison can really be made. The Cheshire Cat has a new favorite as of 09:19 on Sep 15, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2018 09:17
|
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:
And Nebraska  In 2008 Obama won Omaha’s vote for the first blue vote in Nebraska since LBJ.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2018 13:57
|
|
|
ulmont posted:Yes, I totally want the candidate to represent me to be chosen by the Speaker of the House / Minority Leader. That's not how it is done here but rather (in general, it depends on the party's rules) the party assembly votes on nominees and party chairman (who would also be the PM candidate). All party members can vote. For parliamentary and municipal elections the voter can choose from a larger list of candidates, anyway, as this is not FPTP. Say what you will about that, but Trump could only win in a primary system where his babbling could sway the unwashed fascist masses to vote him over Jeb!. A system that bad has to go.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2018 15:21
|
|
|
 As found on TWITTER, no less!
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2018 19:38
|
|
|
Didn't know misquoting someone or failing to note page numbers were plagiarism. "The mo you know." - Et Al, PHD
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2018 20:54
|
|
|
klafbang posted:Freakonomics actually looked into the home field advantage, the TL;DR is that the home field advantage is largely because the judge is friendlier to the home team because their fans are louder. And in some cases, most famously Manchester United and the New England Patriots, home field advantage happens because the coach is an rear end in a top hat and the referees don’t want to have to deal with his whining. Of course, this does feed into a persecution complex whenever the rules are administered fairly (see, for example, the Pats going from the biggest defenders of the catch rule when it got them the #1 seed last year to one of the biggest critics when it lost them the Super Bowl)
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2018 21:17
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:
Today I learned it's possible to plagiarize yourself.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2018 21:30
|
|
|
The real offense is using a (very poorly laid out) flowchart for what amounts to a scale.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2018 21:47
|
|
|
Powered Descent posted:Today I learned it's possible to plagiarize yourself. Oh, definitely. It can either be innocuous or meaningful. Say you sold the rights to previous work to a publisher; if you're using some of that work in something new then you're "self-plagiarizing". Or, say you publish essentially the same paper in two journals. SupSuper posted:The real offense is using a (very poorly laid out) flowchart for what amounts to a scale. Yeah, that's the main issue I have with it. I didn't read enough to see whether it's any good.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2018 22:18
|
|
|
Powered Descent posted:Today I learned it's possible to plagiarize yourself. I hate that this is called plagiarism, but it's absolutely something that an academic can get in trouble for. When you publish a paper, you generally have to turn the copyright over to the journal that accepts it so that they can distribute it without having to get your signature on innumerable forms. If you then turn around and copy a substantial amount of text from that paper and publish it in a different journal, then that can become an issue. The solution is to completely scrap the journal system and replace it with something sane, but until then, we have to worry about this poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2018 22:19
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:
im glad this author wrote something that nobody would want to copy
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2018 22:28
|
|
|
ultrafilter posted:When you publish a paper, you generally have to turn the copyright over to the journal that accepts it so that they can distribute it without having to get your signature on innumerable forms. Granting them a broad licence would work fine but the journals want it all.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2018 23:04
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Granting them a broad licence would work fine but the journals want it all. Now that I think about it the issue is not just the copyright but the misrepresentation of old work as new.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2018 23:14
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Now that I think about it the issue is not just the copyright but the misrepresentation of old work as new. I don't know how common it is for academic journals, but I have for sure read history books that had chapters copied from the author's earlier work, with minor edits. Gave me a feeling of mad deja vu.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 03:40
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:
I think the content is fine, but I would think someone that brands themselves as "The Visual Communication Guy" it would have less words and it wouldn't be laid out like a garbage pile.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 03:43
|
|
|
Isnt the number of times a paper is cited one of the biggest metrics? Cite yourself and get your own numbers up!
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 03:57
|
|
|
Sentient Data posted:Get more citations with this one weird trick!
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 08:55
|
|
|
Xenoborg posted:Isnt the number of times a paper is cited one of the biggest metrics? Cite yourself and get your own numbers up! Yeah. Researchers discovered and exploited that, so then "impact" became important (it's basically pagerank for scientific citations). Then journals started adding requirements "you have to cite 5 of our previously published papers" to inflate impact, so impact became cross-journal. Luckily, most journals are owned by just a handful of publishers, so the same trick worked, except "cite 5 papers from this vaguely related one we also own." Then I left research so there's probably something dumber now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 09:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 01:57 |
|
|
TinTower posted:And in some cases, most famously Manchester United and the New England Patriots, home field advantage happens because the coach is an rear end in a top hat and the referees don’t want to have to deal with his whining. This idea that it's all about the referee just doesn't seem to tally (specifically for 'soccer'). In the English Premier League last year 80 penalties were awarded over the course of 380 games. That's a max of 21% of games having a penalty kick awarded, although it'll actually be lower than that as presumably some games had 2+ penalties awarded. There's obviously free kicks, yellow/red cards and even offside decisions as well, but even if you worked out how many incorrect decisions led to a goal being either scored or disallowed I suspect the percentage of games in which this happened would be negligible. Professional footballers, when playing a home game in the afternoon, generally follow a routine of getting up in the morning, having a light breakfast, a light workout and a high-carb lunch. Between them they'll be discussing tactics with the manager and other coaches - at most clubs this'll be done in a purpose-built conference room of some sort, and these days will include a powerpoint presentation complete with pictures of opposing players and so forth. Any visits to pysiotherapists, doctors, sports scientists etc will be done at this time as well, and players will try on their kit long before the game so the kit staff can sort out problems well in advance of the game starting. They'll be shielded from the media; many clubs specifically instruct their non-playing staff not to even bring in a newspaper incase a player sees something in it that will affect his games. They'll go out properly warmed up and with strategy and tactics fresh in their heads because they'll have been going over it literally minutes before. Contrast this with footballers who have to travel to an away game. They'll also have a light breakfast and workout, before sitting on a coach for several hours. There may or may not be a tactical discussion at this point, but even if there is it'll consist of bits of paper being passed around, and little chance for proper discussion. On arrival at the club they'll be taken to the away dressing room, which is usually of sub-standard quality to the home dressing room (intentionally). Then they've got to wolf down some food before a pre-match warm up on whichever part of the pitch the groundskeeping staff aren't coincidentally having to do some work on at that very moment. There's all sorts of other things the home side can do as well; in Scotland, Celtic boss Brendan Rodgers complained last season that Hearts were letting the grass grow too long on their pitch which stopped them being able to pass the ball as well. In August Hearts beat Celtic 1-0 at home, and shortly after posted this on Twitter. Rant over. Sorry I don't have a graph 
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2018 15:32
|
|