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. Achieved on 2025-03-02.40 new subscribers by the end of the year 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.
27 Comments
space@reddthat.com · 6 pts · 1y
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.
AlolanVulpix@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 1y
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!
Sunshine@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 1y
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!
AlolanVulpix@lemmy.ca · 6 pts · 1y
Potential Goals:
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.Sunshine@lemmy.ca · 5 pts · 1y
Sunshine@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 1y
AlolanVulpix@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 1y
Some additional restrictions on mods: must be registered on a Canadian owned and operated lemmy instance.
Sunshine@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 1y
Yup, don't want that situation where Dennis Pilon had to fight off 2 bad faith american lawyers trying to argue passing any proportional representation at all in Canada would be "unconstitutional".
AlolanVulpix@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 1y
Hmm, an article from American owned media no less.
Sunshine@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 1y
Yeah, it's on the avoid list hehe.
observantTrapezium@lemmy.ca · 6 pts · 1y
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!
AlolanVulpix@lemmy.ca · 6 pts · 1y
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).
Sunshine@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 1y
I can see this place with 1k subs one day!
Yoga@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 1y
AlolanVulpix@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 1y
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…
Ok, I'll take this into consideration.
I agree!
vatlark@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 1y
I'm not a Canadian, y'all got this!
AlolanVulpix@lemmy.ca · 6 pts · 1y
Thank you for your encouragement!
Sunshine@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 1y
More countries are adopting pr!
AlolanVulpix@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 1y
In other good news, we are the #17th most visited community this month! We have 785 users/month.
ahal@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 1y
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!
AlolanVulpix@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 1y
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:
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!
ahal@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 1y
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!
threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 1y
Seconded.
AlolanVulpix@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 1y
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.
threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 1y
They kind of go hand in hand though. Given Lemmy's demographics, the "general Canadian politics" posts which get the most traction are going to be anti-conservative ones.
My main concern with general politics posts is that they will dilute the core message of PR. Too much "clutter" in people's feeds might also cause the people who are most interested in PR to unsubscribe.
AlolanVulpix@lemmy.ca · 0 pts · 1y
Not really. You can have one without the other.
We also need general politics posts to grow the movement to new people who have never heard of proportional representation before. I've generally tried to keep topics to democracy, or from PR supporting parties, or PR itself. It's not like there are no rules.
This isn't what I've found to be the case based on the community statistics I've been tracking every day. The data suggests more activity consisent with what I've mentioned earlier (topics to democracy, or from PR supporting parties, or PR itself).
I'm sorry that you believe this is not what the PR community needs, but if you can come up with more PR content, by all means post them to the community. I'm just a volunteer, so you really shouldn't be expecting anything from me for a free service.
threelonmusketeers@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 1y
That's an interesting idea, though I don't think it is the only way to achieve that goal. I think mentioning PR in and crossposting to general Canadian politics communities could work too.
I'm not sure that raw engagement is necessarily the best metric to track. Outrage is great for engagement, but often does not lead to constructive action. For example, I've increases in "haha, PP bad" comments, which, while they might be true, exacerbate political division and do directly advance awareness of PR.
Is your strategy to use engagement-optimized posts as a sort of advertisement for the community? That would be an interesting idea, though I am unsure of its effectiveness.
Of course. I hope I didn't come across as ungrateful. I'd love to see this community succeed at its goals of getting PR implemented across Canada. Thank you for all the work that you do. :)
MyBrainHurts@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 1y
AlolanVulpix@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 1y
Content Moderation policies
Content Moderation Policies for c/fairvote [en-CA]
:::spoiler 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:
Off-Topic Content:
2. Language Policy
3. Conduct Standards
Be Respectful:
Be Factual:
Be Constructive:
4. Prohibited Content
The following are not permitted:
5. Specific Content Guidelines
Partisan Discussion:
Evidence and Claims:
Cross-posting:
6. Moderation Approach
Moderation Actions May Include:
Progressive Enforcement:
7. Appeals Process
8. Community Input
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]
:::spoiler 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 :
Contenu hors sujet :
2. Politique linguistique
3. Normes de conduite
Soyez respectueux :
Soyez factuel :
Soyez constructif :
4. Contenu interdit
Les éléments suivants ne sont pas autorisés :
5. Directives spécifiques de contenu
Discussion partisane :
Preuves et affirmations :
Publications croisées :
6. Approche de modération
Les actions de modération peuvent inclure :
Application progressive :
7. Processus d'appel
8. Contribution de la communauté
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. :::
scott_anon_21@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 1y