For context, it's a hard enough problem that Google Translate's own romanised pronunciation guides are frequently wrong, or disagree with their text-to-speech.

It also reminds me of the Emily programming language: https://github.com/mcclure/emily/blob/stable/doc/tutorial.md

Presumably this is a so-called “chicken bit”.

I think you can be concerned about voters with low levels of education and poor socio-economic circumstances being pressured to vote one way or another without immediately framing it in this racialised way. Why must it be a “clan”? Does such a concept even have a clear definition? Wouldn't Swedes with a Somali background perhaps be inclined to support someone else who is also Somali if they happened to be a candidate for political office, as they would feel represented by them? How do we know they are from the same “clan” and not just the same country? Are Sweden Finns who vote for Sweden Finnish candidates “clan voters”?

Similarly I can point out that mosques are not special. If someone is influenced in how they choose to vote by what they hear at church, are they a “church voter”? Remember that religious institutions are often at the centre of social life in certain communities.

I think in that context it should be pointed out that the 2026 election was not particularly remarkable. It went from a 2-seat majority for the liberal-conservative bloc to a 2-seat majority for the liberal-left bloc (there's two different liberal centrist parties, one in each bloc… Sweden's a funny place). There was a mere 0.67 percentage point increase in turnout from last election. Some of that may be from recently naturalised citizens, who according to polling are somewhat more likely to vote for the left-leaning parties (not strange given those parties are less hostile to immigrants). But the biggest change in this election is the 3.05 percentage point drop in support for the most right-wing anti-immigrant party. I don't think you need to resort to accusations of fraud to explain that one: the anti-establishment populists have been in power for the first time ever, and been forced to compromise. It's not surprising that voters become a bit less enthusiastic. But only marginally: this was an election won on a single-percentage-point swing. If there's been large-scale fraud here, it's very very subtle.

- There's an ongoing investigation into alleged election fraud, which has not yet proven anything

- The candidate himself is not even a suspect in that investigation

- The candidate is known to have had some contacts with Somali government officials in the past, but no relation to this election is alleged by said investigation

- So far, it doesn't sound like they even have actual evidence any fraud took place (https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/senaste-nytt-om-val-2026?...)

I believe in innocent until proven guilty. Remember that political opponents might have an incentive to fabricate allegations.

The seat would have gone to the Left Party either way. But only this guy specifically got enough personal support to get elected. There's nothing that crazy about it. Participative democracy rewards those who choose to participate. In this case, it's a two-tier participation system. People who vote for a party, but not for a specific candidate, are letting the people who do vote for a specific candidate choose for them. And that's fine.

Ah, this submission should have a “(2023)” added to the title. In 2024, Nuked-SC55 (https://github.com/nukeykt/Nuked-SC55) was released, which is a fully accurate software emulation of the SC-55/SC-55mkII (it relies on having the original ROM files).

I don't think it's even gatekeeping. You could copy-paste two tables and write two sentences into a Word document and export to HTML, one of the laziest possible ways to produce a website, and it'd still be less off-putting because it doesn't have the association with slop content.