• Solumbran@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    14 days ago

    I find it a bit weird to have a criteria of “quality of the internet” but not a single point related to discriminations.

    So you can be state controlled by the KKK, as long as you have good internet it’s a good place to be in?

      • Solumbran@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        14 days ago

        I mean, it has quality of schools, renewable energy use, those are not more health-related than discrimination.

        • higgsboson@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          14 days ago

          Again, it is funded by a corporation. Not just any corporation, either. If you want to take issue with it, be my guest, but I didnt write it and as I alluded to, I think it is already suspect because of UnitedHealth’s involvement.

      • Solumbran@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        12 days ago

        My point was that discriminations (example, if a state was governed by the KKK) are not measured as part of being a good place to live in, which I find ridiculous.

        Also if you ask me, all the states qualify considering the political state of the USA.

        • prettybunnys@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          12 days ago

          Ok so you can’t have it both ways.

          If all the states qualify by your metric then there is no reason using it as a metric. They all tick the box.

          I think you might be able to look at the map and find how their metrics seem to correlate with what you might expect for the places that have a higher rate of discrimination, however