[Meta] 2025Q1 - What are the objectives of our Fair Vote community?
[Meta] 2025Q1 - What are the objectives of our Fair Vote community?
Preface
I'm writing this on the eve of Ontario's 2025 election. I know that this is unfortunately another election that is not held under a proportional representation (PR) electoral system.
I am just an ordinary Canadian citizen -- I don't consider myself an activist, yet I can recognize an unfair and abusive system.
But now is not the time to let pessimism dissuade us from the democracy we deserve. With Duverger's Law (i.e., in non-PR electoral systems, a trend towards a two-parties), we are running out of time to act. Canada's 2021 effective number of parties is 2.76 - this number will decrease over time, and will eventually end Canadian democracy as we know it today.
I'm not writing this to get donation money (although here is the Fair Vote Canada donation site), but this is just the reality with live with and the future we are fighting for.
Proposed 2025 objective
to be in the top 100 most subscribed communities for lemmy.ca. Achieved on 2025-03-02.- As of writing this post (2025-02-26), !fairvote@lemmy.ca is currently 111th rank with 261 subscribers.
To be in the top 100, this would technically mean having >= 296 subscribers, but for simplicity, let's set the goal to be >= 300 subscribers before 2026. That's just ~40 new subscribers by the end of the year. Achieved on 2025-03-02.Where we currently are https://lemmy.ca/communities?listingType=Local&sort=TopAll&page=3, and where we want to be https://lemmy.ca/communities?listingType=Local&sort=TopAll&page=2 (or on page=1, of course). Achieved on 2025-03-02.
While I love a good, yeasty, loaf of bread 🍞, !bread@lemmy.ca has 638 subscribers, which is 144.4% more than our 261. I suppose you could say I'm jealous.
Next steps
Before the end of March 2025, please comment on whether:
- this is a good objective to have
- if it's not a good objective, what other objectives should we pursue
- Ideas on how to achieve our objectives
Statistics
| Date | users/month | u/m % of c/Canada | mod/u/m | posts | comments | Subscribers | subscribers % of c/Canada |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-02-26 | - | - | - | - | - | 261 | - |
| 2025-02-28 | 785 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 2025-03-03 | 866 | 11.994% | 23.09‱ | 205 | 629 | 323 | 3.968% |
| 2025-03-04 | 942 | 13.120% | 21.23‱ | 211 | 654 | 342 | 4.191% |
| 2025-03-05 | 894 | 12.556% | 22.37‱ | 213 | 665 | 354 | 4.317% |
| 2025-03-06 | 891 | 11.770% | 22.45‱ | 218 | 674 | 374 | 4.539% |
| 2025-03-07 | 904 | 10.984% | 22.12‱ | 219 | 683 | 377 | 4.531% |
| 2025-03-08 | 951 | 11.149% | 21.03‱ | 229 | 694 | 389 | 4.587% |
| 2025-03-09 | 971 | 11.174% | 20.60‱ | 232 | 706 | 406 | 4.749% |
| 2025-03-10 | 1.02k | 11.384% | 19.61‱ | 237 | 740 | 421 | 4.867% |
| 2025-03-11 | 1.04k | 11.441% | 19.608‱ | 238 | 750 | 437 | 5.017% |
| 2025-03-12 | 1.05k | 11.254% | 19.048‱ | 239 | 751 | 441 | 5.029% |
| 2025-03-13 | 1.12K | 11.655% | 17.857‱ | 247 | 804 | 442 | 5.017% |
| 2025-03-14 | 1.17k | 12.037% | 17.094‱ | 259 | 828 | 448 | 5.062% |
| 2025-03-15 | 1.19k | 12.143% | 16.807‱ | 270 | 853 | 452 | 5.079% |
| 2025-03-16 | 1.22k | 12.449% | 16.393‱ | 273 | 868 | 459 | 5.140% |
| 2025-03-17 | 1.3k | 13.333% | 15.385‱ | 280 | 907 | 465 | 5.196% |
| 2025-03-18 | 1.33K | 13.516% | 15.038‱ | 291 | 952 | 469 | 5.229% |
| 2025-03-19 | 1.36k | 13.977% | 14.706‱ | 296 | 989 | 471 | 5.233% |
| 2025-03-20 | 1.41k | 9.78k (u/m Canada) | 2 (mods) | 310 | 1.04k | 474 | 9.02k (subs Canada) |
| 2025-03-21 | 1.48k | 10k | 2 | 332 | 1.04k | 479 | 9.04k |
| 2025-03-22 | 1.51k | 10.3k | 2 | 348 | 1.1k | 481 | 9.06k |
| 2025-03-23 | 1.53k | 10.4k | 2 | 361 | 1.13k | 485 | 9.08k |
| 2025-03-24 | 1.55k | 10.4k | 2 | 370 | 1.18k | 490 | 9.1k |
| 2025-03-25 | 1.58k | 10.5k | 2 | 382 | 1.22k | 509 | 9.13k |
| 2025-03-26 | 1.64k | 10.6k | 2 | 417 | 1.27k | 533 | 9.15k |
| 2025-03-27 | 1.71k | 10.6k | 2 | 450 | 1.35k | 554 | 9.16k |
| 2025-03-28 | 1.75k | 10.8k | 2 | 476 | 1.4k | 558 | 9.22k |
| 2025-03-29 | 1.79k | 10.9k | 2 | 494 | 1.45k | 562 | 9.26k |
| 2025-03-30 | 1.83k | 11k | 2 | 516 | 1.47k | 562 | 9.27k |
| 2025-03-31 | 1.87k | 11.1k | 2 | 537 | 1.52k | 571 | 9.31k |
| 2025-04-01 | 1.92k | 11.2k | 2 | 570 | 1.55k | 572 | 9.33k |
| 2025-04-02 | 1.9k | 11.3k | 2 | 581 | 1.59k | 576 | 9.36k |
| 2025-04-03 | 1.81k | 11.3k | 2 | 609 | 1.6k | 580 | 9.39k |
| 2025-04-04 | 1.78k | 11.4k | 2 | 612 | 1.61K | 580 | 9.41k |
Done.
I think these two separate objectives are good, but at the end of the day subscriber count is just a number. The real objective is having an actual representative democracy in Canada at all levels of government.
Even with 261 subs, posts from this comm can reach "all" (that's how I found this place). That's the way to reach people who aren't too engaged with this topic. We just need to have a critical mass of people upvoting.
Good luck voting fellow Ontarians!!! May the 45th Parliament be proportionally representative!
Thanks for your feedback! I was unaware 'all' was a mean to find this fairvote community.
Overall, I agree, but in the meanwhile, we should make a conscious and concerted effort towards a goal.
A sort of sub task leading up to the goal of proportional representation.
Increasing the subscriber count helps towards that (at least in my opinion).
I can see this place with 1k subs one day!
I am so glad to see this place pop up, it has been my biggest issue in voting. Its fucked up that every vote I have ever cast has been discarded under FPTP.
The fediverse is the perfect place to encourage more people to support proportional representation. Imagine if your only choices were lemmy.ml or lemmy.world.
Your vote should count!
We've been growing at about ~10 new subscribers for the past week. The fair vote movement is truly alive and growing!
We will get proportional representation one day -- we are deserving and entitled to representation!
But we can't do it alone, please spread the word!
Potential Goals:
- Enforce posting standards such as language labelling on new posts (but perhaps not comments). We want to be a bilingual community, supporting both anglophones and francophones.
- At least 1 post for each official language per week.
Growth of >= 1 subscriber per day in 2025. Possibly monetary incentive, for example, if there's +1 local subscriber -> $1 (and $0.90 for subscribers otherwise) for Fair Vote Canada. Have users/month and subscribers be at least >= 3.5% of !canada@lemmy.ca.- Diversifying supply of sources. While Fair Vote Canada is an easy choice, we should seek exposure to other movements such as the Charter Challenge for Fair Voting or Apathy is Boring.
- Self-sustaining community. Currently, it's mostly moderators that are posting. But we are people too...
- Recruit a french moderator. We need someone to focus on that communication front as I'm still a beginner in french maintenant. I suppose a good stopgap can be to post french articles to entice interest.
I'm not a Canadian, y'all got this!
Thank you for your encouragement!
More countries are adopting pr!
if it’s not a good objective, what other objectives should we pursue
What is your actual goal? Electoral reform or making line go up?
Because if you ask me it should be getting people ready to volunteer in battleground ridings so that when people are done, if they won they can use their new relationships to push to prioritize ER.
2 of an MPs constituents asking for something is FAAAAAR different from "2 people on my campain team had this as their #1 priority"
Today I met my MP and I'll probably be volunteering for door knocking on Friday. Be sure to check 338 to see who has the best odds of winning in your riding and see which candidate might be the best ally for ER and also has a better than 3% chance of winning.
What is your actual goal? Electoral reform or making line go up?
Proportional representation, but doing things outside of the community is out of scope of the question. You also don't know what I do or don't do outside of this community.
Edit: it's like me asking you, "do you like chocolate or vanilla", then you come back with, "I want an ice cream parlour". That wasn't even in the question…
Because if you ask me it should be getting people ready to volunteer in battleground ridings so that when people are done, if they won they can use their new relationships to push to prioritize ER.
Ok, I'll take this into consideration.
2 of an MPs constituents asking for something is FAAAAAR different from “2 people on my campain team had this as their #1 priority”
I agree!
In other good news, we are the #17th most visited community this month! We have 785 users/month.
I originally posted this in a separate post, but was redirected here. It's more about the "how" rather than the "what", original text below:
The community description explicitly states that this community is non-partisan. I think this is a very smart call because we'll need people with all sorts of different political ideologies to get onboard if we're ever going have a shot at implementing some form of PR.
However lately the sub seems to be filled with anti Poilievre articles that don't seem to have anything to so with electoral reform. I'm no fan of Poilievre, but in my experience electoral reform is already unfairly labeled as a "leftist" policy.
My opinion is that the most important thing we can do is help conservatives understand that PR is in their best interest just as much as it is for people on the left. It means the conservative movement no longer needs to live under one giant tent. It will be able to split into multiple parties that can then form coalitions on the issues that matter to them. Conservatives on the fringe benefit because at least they'll have some representation in parliament.
Anyway, any conservatives who are interested in electoral reform and come peek at this community will be immediately turned off by the content that's here. So please, let's try to keep posts as non-partisan as possibly, and focused on things relevant to electoral reform!
I completely agree with your points about keeping our focus on electoral reform and maintaining a non-partisan approach. Our community is quite new, and still trying to figure out what it is (hence this thread).
You've hit on something fundamental - proportional representation isn't a left/right issue, it's a democratic fairness issue that benefits voters across the political spectrum.
You're absolutely right that conservatives have just as much to gain from PR as progressives do. Under our current FPTP system, conservative voters in liberal-dominated ridings essentially have no voice in Parliament, and vice versa. PR would allow for a more natural evolution of our political landscape, potentially enabling:
- Conservative voters in urban areas to finally gain representation
- The conservative movement to diversify beyond a single big-tent party
- Issue-based coalitions that better reflect the actual views of voters
- More honest representation without strategic voting distortions
The mathematical case for PR is clear regardless of one's ideology - when roughly 50% of ballots cast make absolutely no difference to the outcome of an election, we have a serious democratic deficit.
I've noticed the same trend you mentioned regarding content that doesn't directly relate to electoral reform (relating to the newness of the forum). While there's certainly room to discuss how various politicians approach democratic issues, we should be cautious about letting the community become an echo chamber or a place that feels unwelcoming to potential PR advocates from across the political spectrum.
Perhaps we could encourage more content that specifically demonstrates how PR would benefit conservative voters? I'd love to see analysis showing how many conservative votes were effectively "wasted" in the last election, or how PR would change representation patterns for conservatives in traditionally non-conservative regions.
See this draft content moderation policy, that I created specifically in response to your feedback!
Right on! That draft looks great, no notes. Just wanted to say thanks for putting it together and for the quick response. Also for taking the time to get this community off the ground, all much appreciated!
Seconded.
The both of you are talking about separate topics.
Ahal is talking about the "anti-conservative" posts, while you are talking about the general Canadian politics.
The purpose of this thread is to discuss exactly that, what kinds of content we should be ok with having in this forum. Please make the case for it, as it's not been brought up explicitly by anybody except yourself.
Content Moderation policies
Content Moderation Policies for c/fairvote [en-CA]
details
Content Moderation Policies for c/fairvote
About Our Community
c/fairvote is a bilingual (English/French) forum dedicated to discussing electoral reform in Canada, with a focus on proportional representation. Our community welcomes everyone interested in learning about, discussing, and advocating for electoral systems that ensure every vote counts.
1. Content Focus
Encouraged Content:
- Information about different electoral systems (FPTP, PR, MMP, STV, etc.)
- News about electoral reform in Canada (federal, provincial, municipal)
- Analysis of election results demonstrating electoral system effects
- International examples and case studies of electoral systems
- Advocacy strategies for electoral reform
- Educational resources about voting systems
- Discussions about democratic institutions and principles
Off-Topic Content:
- Content unrelated to electoral systems or democratic reform
- General partisan politics unrelated to electoral reform
- International politics unrelated to electoral systems or democratic institutions
2. Language Policy
- Posts and comments in either English or French are welcome
- Translation requests are welcome but not required
- Respectful corrections of language usage are permitted
3. Conduct Standards
Be Respectful:
- Focus on ideas, not individuals
- Disagree without personal attacks
- Respect different perspectives on electoral reform
Be Factual:
- Back claims with evidence when possible
- Properly attribute sources and quotes
- Avoid misrepresenting opposing positions
- Correct mistakes when identified
Be Constructive:
- Aim to advance understanding of electoral systems
- Consider how your contributions help others learn
- Offer solutions, not just criticisms
- Engage with the strongest version of opposing arguments
4. Prohibited Content
The following are not permitted:
- Harassment or personal attacks
- Discriminatory content based on identity (race, gender, etc.)
- Deliberate misinformation about electoral systems
- Spam, repetitive posting, or flooding
- Content that violates Canadian law
- Calls for violence or illegal activities
- Doxxing or sharing personal information without consent
5. Specific Content Guidelines
Partisan Discussion:
- Discussing parties' positions on electoral reform is permitted
- Focus on policies and principles, not partisan rivalries
- Avoid blanket statements about voters of any political affiliation
Evidence and Claims:
- Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence
- Link to sources when citing statistics or research
- Be transparent about your information sources
Cross-posting:
- Cross-posting relevant content from other communities is allowed
- Respect original content creators and provide attribution
6. Moderation Approach
Moderation Actions May Include:
- Removal of content that violates guidelines
- Temporary or permanent bans for serious or repeated violations
- Content warnings or labels on borderline content
- Thread locking when discussions become unproductive
Progressive Enforcement:
- Informal reminder about guidelines
- Official warning
- Temporary restrictions
- Permanent removal (for serious or repeated violations)
7. Appeals Process
- Decisions can be appealed via messaging a mod
- Explain why you believe the moderation action was incorrect
- Appeals will be reviewed by a different moderator than the original decision maker
- Response to appeals within 72 hours
8. Community Input
- Periodic review of moderation policies with community feedback
- Transparency reports on moderation actions
- Open discussion threads for community concerns about moderation
These policies aim to foster a productive space for learning about and advocating for proportional representation, while ensuring respectful and evidence-based discussion. Our goal is to build a community that advances understanding of electoral reform in Canada, not to restrict legitimate debate or differing perspectives.
Politiques de modération de contenu pour c/fairvote [fr-CA]
details
Politiques de modération de contenu pour c/fairvote
À propos de notre communauté
c/fairvote est un forum bilingue (anglais/français) dédié à la discussion sur la réforme électorale au Canada, avec un accent sur la représentation proportionnelle. Notre communauté accueille toute personne intéressée à apprendre, discuter et défendre des systèmes électoraux qui garantissent que chaque vote compte.
1. Orientation du contenu
Contenu encouragé :
- Informations sur les différents systèmes électoraux (SMUT, RP, RPM, VUT, etc.)
- Actualités sur la réforme électorale au Canada (fédéral, provincial, municipal)
- Analyse des résultats électoraux démontrant les effets du système électoral
- Exemples internationaux et études de cas de systèmes électoraux
- Stratégies de plaidoyer pour la réforme électorale
- Ressources éducatives sur les systèmes de vote
- Discussions sur les institutions et principes démocratiques
Contenu hors sujet :
- Contenu sans rapport avec les systèmes électoraux ou la réforme démocratique
- Politique partisane générale sans lien avec la réforme électorale
- Politique internationale sans rapport avec les systèmes électoraux ou les institutions démocratiques
2. Politique linguistique
- Les publications et commentaires en anglais ou en français sont bienvenus
- Les demandes de traduction sont bienvenues mais non obligatoires
- Les corrections respectueuses de l'usage linguistique sont autorisées
3. Normes de conduite
Soyez respectueux :
- Concentrez-vous sur les idées, pas sur les individus
- Exprimez votre désaccord sans attaques personnelles
- Respectez les différentes perspectives sur la réforme électorale
Soyez factuel :
- Appuyez vos affirmations par des preuves lorsque possible
- Attribuez correctement les sources et citations
- Évitez de déformer les positions opposées
- Corrigez les erreurs lorsqu'elles sont identifiées
Soyez constructif :
- Visez à faire progresser la compréhension des systèmes électoraux
- Considérez comment vos contributions aident les autres à apprendre
- Proposez des solutions, pas seulement des critiques
- Engagez-vous avec la version la plus solide des arguments opposés
4. Contenu interdit
Les éléments suivants ne sont pas autorisés :
- Harcèlement ou attaques personnelles
- Contenu discriminatoire basé sur l'identité (race, genre, etc.)
- Désinformation délibérée sur les systèmes électoraux
- Spam, publications répétitives ou inondation
- Contenu qui viole la loi canadienne
- Appels à la violence ou activités illégales
- Divulgation d'informations personnelles sans consentement
5. Directives spécifiques de contenu
Discussion partisane :
- La discussion sur les positions des partis concernant la réforme électorale est autorisée
- Concentrez-vous sur les politiques et les principes, pas sur les rivalités partisanes
- Évitez les déclarations générales sur les électeurs de toute affiliation politique
Preuves et affirmations :
- Les affirmations extraordinaires nécessitent des preuves extraordinaires
- Fournissez des liens vers les sources lorsque vous citez des statistiques ou des recherches
- Soyez transparent concernant vos sources d'information
Publications croisées :
- Le partage croisé de contenu pertinent provenant d'autres communautés est autorisé
- Respectez les créateurs de contenu original et fournissez l'attribution
6. Approche de modération
Les actions de modération peuvent inclure :
- Suppression de contenu qui viole les directives
- Suspensions temporaires ou permanentes pour violations graves ou répétées
- Avertissements ou Ă©tiquettes sur le contenu limite
- Verrouillage de fil de discussion lorsque les discussions deviennent improductives
Application progressive :
- Rappel informel des directives
- Avertissement officiel
- Restrictions temporaires
- Suppression permanente (pour violations graves ou répétées)
7. Processus d'appel
- Les décisions peuvent être contestées en contactant un modérateur
- Expliquez pourquoi vous pensez que l'action de modération était incorrecte
- Les appels seront examinés par un modérateur différent de celui qui a pris la décision initiale
- RĂ©ponse aux appels dans les 72 heures
8. Contribution de la communauté
- Révision périodique des politiques de modération avec rétroaction de la communauté
- Rapports de transparence sur les actions de modération
- Fils de discussion ouverts pour les préoccupations de la communauté concernant la modération
Ces politiques visent à favoriser un espace productif pour apprendre et défendre la représentation proportionnelle, tout en assurant une discussion respectueuse et fondée sur des preuves. Notre objectif est de construire une communauté qui fait progresser la compréhension de la réforme électorale au Canada, et non de restreindre le débat légitime ou les perspectives différentes.