Well, I've found this week's most clueless comment ever

In response to "Stop using gypsy, it's a slur" round 1,000:

The same people that suddenly decided that a word that has been acceptable for generations is suddenly determined to be a "slur". Try referring to that word as a slur in Ireland, Scotland, Spain, France or Portugal and see what results you get.

Yeah, I'm definitely going to take the opinions of people in an area that's a hotbed of virulent anti-Roma prejudice. Uh-huh.

I have no idea, btw, why people are so freaking attached to this word. If we exclude it from proper names*, the number of times I've ever had to use it and not saying "yeah, don't use this word" can be counted on one hand.

* People give themselves and their children and their pets all sorts of inappropriate names. When you know better, you do better - well, unless you'd rather whine about it.

Doing some simple pre-Election Day research

One of the issues on the ballot in NYC this year is ranked choice voting (but only for primaries).

And it's... I mean, I'm going to vote for it, because at this point I think almost anything has to be better than the system we currently have, but I'm not a huge fan. I'd prefer a simple ballot where you can pick multiple candidates without ranking them, for two reasons.

First of all, I think the concept is just easier to explain and a bit more intuitive for people who haven't spent a great deal of time (or any time) considering voting options. We've ALL taken internet and magazine polls that allow you to pick more than one option per question.

Secondly, and equally importantly, I think a lot of people don't know all that much about candidates when they enter the booth. They know they like this one, they don't like that one, and they have varying but unspecific feelings about these ones. Asking them to rank them or do anything more complex than say "Yup, this one would be okay!" and "God, not that one!" is a bit of a stretch.

Also - only primaries? C'mon.