Stop Brexit: A million people sign UK petition to stay in EU

[vinny41]

9 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 Drafted and to be submitted by whom?

 

How will you overcome the objections to this I raised earlier; which you probably missed as they were in a lengthy post. So I'll repeat them in the hope you've manged to read this far.

 

I wonder why your so dead against any vertification of the petition website

[vinny41]

10 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 As expected it went they way of the vast majority of these petitions. Indeed, based on my experience with petitions on other matters, I predicted as much from the start.

 

But, it does show the large and increasing support for Remain.

 

Maybe more MPs will see this as a sign that they should let the people decide.

 

How likely are MPs to back a second referendum on Brexit?

As that article says, it is not a foregone conclusion that enough of the abstainers would back a second referendum; but it's not impossible either.

Two hundred and sixty eight MPs backed a new public vote, with 295 opposed: that makes 47.6 per cent in favour – fewer than support a customs union, but more than May's deal. Having been dismissed by many since June 2016, a second referendum is now a genuine possibility. Its fate largely lies with the 75 MPs who abstained from voting.

The above statement is incorrect as it the last vote for May deal the voting numbers were 

286 votes for May deal and 344 against   a margin of 58,

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47752017

[7by7]

2 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

I haven't gone into a hissy fit as you say I think your the person that having a hissy fit, you ask me to search for a post on here like I am your lackey don't think so if you want to search the forums to prove your point.

I am not asking you to be my lackey, I am asking you to prove that you posted what you v=claim to have posted by producing said post. That you continue to make excuses for not doing so only convinces me further that this post does not actually exist!

 

5 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

Most decent people I know including myself if we found a security breach on a website that could lead to fraudulent activity

would not publish those details on a public forum in order to promote more fraudulent activity.

But you haven't found a security breach, you are merely claiming that such a breach may exists and that it accounts for a large number of the signatures!

 

The petitions site staff have declined to reveal how many fraudulent signatures they have found and how they did so. They have, however, confirmed that any and all fraudulent signatures have been removed. For the very reasons you state, they have not informed those responsible that the signatures have been removed.

9 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

As to what the staff said on the petitions website was a standard reply, I am aware of Banks that have security breaches but have never admitted to such security breaches as admitted to such breaches could cause a loss of confidence from their customers and shareholders.

The petitions website is not a bank; and they have admitted to breaches as I said earlier and again above. I even provided a quote from them! Here it is the article again: Is the “stop Brexit” petition reliable?

Quote

“We do not comment in detail on fraud. Ideally someone who has tried to fraudulently sign the petition would never realise that they have failed.

 

13 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

Just to let you know I have written to my MP on many different occasions and yes the MP staff read the inital letter and if the issue is considered important is immediately for the attention of the MP

'If the issue is considered important' being the nub of the matter!

 

I, too, have written to my MP on matters I consider important, some I've received a reply to, others not.

 

15 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

While you may be interested in my MP reply all correspondence between mps and constituents are regarded as  confidential

which means for my eyes only

If you wish to let others know the contents, it is your right to do so. Just as I posted in the Visas and migration to other countries forum the reply I received about the outrageous decision to charge UK visa application fees in USD rather than Sterling. A meaningless reply, I may add.

[vinny41]

2 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

I am not asking you to be my lackey, I am asking you to prove that you posted what you v=claim to have posted by producing said post. That you continue to make excuses for not doing so only convinces me further that this post does not actually exist!

 

But you haven't found a security breach, you are merely claiming that such a breach may exists and that it accounts for a large number of the signatures!

 

The petitions site staff have declined to reveal how many fraudulent signatures they have found and how they did so. They have, however, confirmed that any and all fraudulent signatures have been removed. For the very reasons you state, they have not informed those responsible that the signatures have been removed.

The petitions website is not a bank; and they have admitted to breaches as I said earlier and again above. I even provided a quote from them! Here it is the article again: Is the “stop Brexit” petition reliable?

 

'If the issue is considered important' being the nub of the matter!

 

I, too, have written to my MP on matters I consider important, some I've received a reply to, others not.

 

If you wish to let others know the contents, it is your right to do so. Just as I posted in the Visas and migration to other countries forum the reply I received about the outrageous decision to charge UK visa application fees in USD rather than Sterling. A meaningless reply, I may add.

As previously stated I have stated many times on these forums that all petitions are pointless and worthless without a correct verification process in place and the posts do exist on this forum

[evadgib]

15 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

Drafted and to be submitted by whom?

 

How will you overcome the objections to this I raised earlier; which you probably missed as they were in a lengthy post. So I'll repeat them in the hope you've manged to read this far.

You cannot pick a pickpocket's pocket 49 ????

For obvious reasons there will be no movement before UK leaves the EU & I suspect it'll be painfully slow afterwards with no Yvette Cooper to fast-track it through the commons in 4hrs as seen last week.

 

[7by7]

14 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

I wonder why your so dead against any vertification of the petition website

 I have not said I am against further verification, merely shown you why your suggestions; NI number, British passport number, voting register number, are impractical.

 

I am also satisfied with the explanations given by the staff showing that they are as secure. I will remain satisfied until and unless someone who has actual real experience of the site and it's security says otherwise.

 

I am certainly not going to take the word of a bunch of pro Brexiteers who claim to have hacked the site but whose votes were almost certainly removed by the existing measure.

 

9 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

Two hundred and sixty eight MPs backed a new public vote, with 295 opposed: that makes 47.6 per cent in favour – fewer than support a customs union, but more than May's deal. Having been dismissed by many since June 2016, a second referendum is now a genuine possibility. Its fate largely lies with the 75 MPs who abstained from voting.

The above statement is incorrect as it the last vote for May deal the voting numbers were 

286 votes for May deal and 344 against   a margin of 58,

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47752017

 

Not every MP voted, some abstained. More voted in the vote on may's deal than did so in the vote on a second referendum. If you bothered to read the whole article, you would know they are referring to the percentages of those who voted: 47.6% in favour of a new vote, 45.4% in favour of May's deal.

[vinny41]

Is it possible to repeatedly sign a parliamentary petition using the same email address?

Claim

You can sign the Revoke Article 50 petition repeatedly using the same email address.

You can sign the Revoke Article 50 petition using any name you want.

Conclusion

It’s possible to use the same email address twice but no more than that.

It is possible to sign using a false name.

A House of Commons spokesperson told us it’s possible to sign a petition up to two times from the same email address, but no more than that.

So anyone creating an email address in the name of Nigel [email protected] looking up his home address is able to vote for a petition that everyone knows that Nigel wouldn't sign up for 

https://fullfact.org/europe/possible-repeatedly-sign-parliamentary-petition/?utm_source=homepage&utm_medium=first_row

[7by7]

10 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

As previously stated I have stated many times on these forums that all petitions are pointless and worthless without a correct verification process in place and the posts do exist on this forum

And as I have stated, you have said so many times in this topic, but not on others when we were discussing the pro Brexit petitions last December.

 

But as you refuse to even try and prove me wrong. let's leave it there.

[vinny41]

2 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 I have not said I am against further verification, merely shown you why your suggestions; NI number, British passport number, voting register number, are impractical.

 

I am also satisfied with the explanations given by the staff showing that they are as secure. I will remain satisfied until and unless someone who has actual real experience of the site and it's security says otherwise.

 

I am certainly not going to take the word of a bunch of pro Brexiteers who claim to have hacked the site but whose votes were almost certainly removed by the existing measure.

 

 

Not every MP voted, some abstained. More voted in the vote on may's deal than did so in the vote on a second referendum. If you bothered to read the whole article, you would know they are referring to the percentages of those who voted: 47.6% in favour of a new vote, 45.4% in favour of May's deal.

Which is the greater number Two hundred and sixty eight MPs backed a new public vote or  Two hundred and eighty six  MP that voted for May deal

[7by7]

6 minutes ago, evadgib said:

You cannot pick a pickpocket's pocket 49 ????

For obvious reasons there will be no movement before UK leaves the EU & I suspect it'll be painfully slow afterwards with no Yvette Cooper to fast-track it through the commons in 4hrs as seen last week.

 

Question dodged; as expected.

 

Still seeing by what means you do so each time is mildly amusing when I've nothing better to do.

[evadgib]

34 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 As expected it went they way of the vast majority of these petitions. Indeed, based on my experience with petitions on other matters, I predicted as much from the start.

 

But, it does show the large and increasing support for Remain.

 

Maybe more MPs will see this as a sign that they should let the people decide.

 

How likely are MPs to back a second referendum on Brexit?

As that article says, it is not a foregone conclusion that enough of the abstainers would back a second referendum; but it's not impossible either.

A common belief in our camp is that a second referendum would deliver a much bigger landslide in our favour. I don't want one but have no fear whatsoever if they head in that direction.

[vinny41]

3 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

And as I have stated, you have said so many times in this topic, but not on others when we were discussing the pro Brexit petitions last December.

 

But as you refuse to even try and prove me wrong. let's leave it there.

Show me the post where i stated " I have stated many times on these forums that all petitions are pointless and worthless without a correct verification process in place" in December December is your timeframe not mine

[7by7]

Just now, vinny41 said:

Which is the greater number Two hundred and sixty eight MPs backed a new public vote or  Two hundred and eighty six  MP that voted for May deal

As I have already explained: not every MP voted, some abstained. More voted in the vote on May's deal than did so in the vote on a second referendum and a greater percentage of those who voted did so for a second referendum than did so for May's deal. 

 

If you want to argue this point further, take up with The New Statesman. maybe you can write to them?

 

However, the fact remains that 268 MPs now back a second referendum.

[7by7]

8 minutes ago, evadgib said:

A common belief in our camp is that a second referendum would deliver a much bigger landslide in our favour. I don't want one but have no fear whatsoever if they head in that direction.

So why are you all so against taking the decision out of the hands of a Parliament who can't or wont decide and giving it to the people to decide?

 

If you are so confident that you'll win, what have you to fear?

 

(Sorry if that's too long for you to read, but I don't see how I could have made it shorter!)

[evadgib]

1 minute ago, 7by7 said:

Question dodged; as expected.

 

Still seeing by what means you do so each time is mildly amusing when I've nothing better to do.

If you can answer questions 6 months in advance please confirm who wins the Rugby World Cup?

[evadgib]

5 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

So why are you all so against taking the decision out of the hands of a Parliament who can't or wont decide and giving it to the people to decide?

 

If you are so confident that you'll win, what have you to fear?

 

(Sorry if that's too long for you to read, but I don't see how I could have made it shorter!)

- If i'm against anything it's their failure to deliver.

- Wasting more time.

Edited April 6, 2019 by evadgib

[7by7]

10 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

Show me the post where i stated " I have stated many times on these forums that all petitions are pointless and worthless without a correct verification process in place" in December December is your timeframe not mine

Yet again I repeat:

 

I cannot show you such a post because I believe it does not exist.

 

I believe that you most definitely did not question the validity of pro Brexit petitions last December and only started to question the validity of Parliamentary petitions at all when this pro Remain one achieved it's record number of signatures.

 

 

 

 

[AlexRich]

2 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

So why are you all so against taking the decision out of the hands of a Parliament who can't or wont decide and giving it to the people to decide?

 

If you are so confident that you'll win, what have you to fear?

 

(Sorry if that's too long for you to read, but I don't see how I could have made it shorter!)

It’s because they know that Brexit is over if a second referendum is called. There is no point whatsoever in being out of the EU, as many people are now realising.

 

Brexiteers write with great confidence about outcomes. The referendum was a battle that they won, but they’ve lost every other battle since then ... nothing about Brexit has gone as smoothly as they predicted. All the fanciful predictions about the EU collapse, German manufacturers have not pressured the government, not a peep from Prosecco sellers in Italy, we’re locked into a £39bn payment, we’re spending more each week on preparation than we’d save from not contributing to the EU, we haven’t rolled over many trade deals, Northern Ireland has turned out to be very important ... etc, etc, ... the whole thing as been a catastrophe. 

[7by7]

12 minutes ago, evadgib said:

If you can answer questions 6 months in advance please confirm who wins the Rugby World Cup?

I asked you 

1 hour ago, 7by7 said:

Drafted and to be submitted by whom?

 

How will you overcome the objections to this I raised earlier...….

 How is that asking you to answer questions 6 months in advance?

 

Addendum; You've plenty of time to think of a proper answer as I'm off for my dinner and then the pub.

 

Edited April 6, 2019 by 7by7

[vinny41]

8 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

Yet again I repeat:

 

I cannot show you such a post because I believe it does not exist.

 

I believe that you most definitely did not question the validity of pro Brexit petitions last December and only started to question the validity of Parliamentary petitions at all when this pro Remain one achieved it's record number of signatures.

 

 

 

 

And your point is that I am biased like you

[vinny41]

21 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

As I have already explained: not every MP voted, some abstained. More voted in the vote on May's deal than did so in the vote on a second referendum and a greater percentage of those who voted did so for a second referendum than did so for May's deal. 

 

If you want to argue this point further, take up with The New Statesman. maybe you can write to them?

 

However, the fact remains that 268 MPs now back a second referendum.

And 286 Mp's voted for May deal

[vinny41]

44 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

Is it possible to repeatedly sign a parliamentary petition using the same email address?

Claim

You can sign the Revoke Article 50 petition repeatedly using the same email address.

You can sign the Revoke Article 50 petition using any name you want.

Conclusion

It’s possible to use the same email address twice but no more than that.

It is possible to sign using a false name.

A House of Commons spokesperson told us it’s possible to sign a petition up to two times from the same email address, but no more than that.

So anyone creating an email address in the name of Nigel [email protected] looking up his home address is able to vote for a petition that everyone knows that Nigel wouldn't sign up for 

https://fullfact.org/europe/possible-repeatedly-sign-parliamentary-petition/?utm_source=homepage&utm_medium=first_row

 

20 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

Yet again I repeat:

 

I cannot show you such a post because I believe it does not exist.

 

I believe that you most definitely did not question the validity of pro Brexit petitions last December and only started to question the validity of Parliamentary petitions at all when this pro Remain one achieved it's record number of signatures.

 

 

 

 

A record number of signatures  that is open to abuse and fraud

[7by7]

5 hours ago, vinny41 said:

Is it possible to repeatedly sign a parliamentary petition using the same email address?

Claim

You can sign the Revoke Article 50 petition repeatedly using the same email address.

You can sign the Revoke Article 50 petition using any name you want.

Conclusion

It’s possible to use the same email address twice but no more than that.

It is possible to sign using a false name.

A House of Commons spokesperson told us it’s possible to sign a petition up to two times from the same email address, but no more than that.

So anyone creating an email address in the name of Nigel [email protected] looking up his home address is able to vote for a petition that everyone knows that Nigel wouldn't sign up for 

https://fullfact.org/europe/possible-repeatedly-sign-parliamentary-petition/?utm_source=homepage&utm_medium=first_row

Is there any reason why you didn't out your quote from Full Fact into a quote box?

 

More importantly; why did you add "So anyone creating an email address in the name of Nigel [email protected] looking up his home address is able to vote for a petition that everyone knows that Nigel wouldn't sign up for" before the link and without starting a new paragraph so that it looks to the casual reader who hasn't read the actual article to be the words of Full Fact when they are actually your words?

 

I can see one reason for your deception; the article actually confirms what I have been saying!

 

Quote

A House of Commons spokesperson told us “Many people share an email account with a partner or do not have access to email. To ensure that the petitions system is as accessible as possible, up to two people can sign from the same email address. An email address can only be used twice.

“The number of these signatures is strictly monitored to ensure that this feature is not abused. The number of these signatures on the article 50 petition is within the normal range—around 1%.

“The Government Digital Service have a number of ways of identifying and preventing fraudulent activity based around blocking, removing and monitoring signatures as appropriate.

“Some types of fraud are monitored to ensure that it does not affect the integrity of the petition. Evidence of fraud may affect whether the Petitions Committee choose to act on the petition.

“We do not comment in detail on fraud. Ideally someone who has tried to fraudulently sign the petition would never realise that they have failed.”

 

I have to wonder why you linked to it at all; did you not read it?

 

Or maybe you did, but hoped others wouldn't and your brief actual quote added to your Farage deception would work and convince people the petition is seriously flawed?

 

But surely you can't think your fellow Brexiteers are that stupid! Can you?

[7by7]

4 hours ago, vinny41 said:

 

A record number of signatures  that is open to abuse and fraud

Not according to the link I provided, and the one you did!

[7by7]

5 hours ago, vinny41 said:

And 286 Mp's voted for May deal

As i said before, if you have a problem with the article using the percentages of those who actually voted, take it up with The New Statesman!

[7by7]

5 hours ago, evadgib said:

- If i'm against anything it's their failure to deliver.

- Wasting more time.

 

I, too, am against Parliament's failure to deliver.

 

A failure caused by Corbyn playing party politics rather than putting the country first. Had he done the right thing and given his MPs a free vote then this matter would been done and dusted long ago and we'd have left on the 29th March as originally scheduled.

 

Wasting more time? What is more time wasting than asking the EU to extend, extend, extend ad infinitum because parliament can't or wont agree. Eventually the EU will lose patience with us (I'm amazed they haven't already) and say that as we can't agree a deal,  it's no deal.

 

Whether you believe no deal to be the best option or not; who would you rather make that decision; the EU or the British public in a democratic, legally binding referendum?

Edited April 6, 2019 by 7by7
Typo

[vinny41]

13 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

Not according to the link I provided, and the one you did!

I will repeat myself a petition site  is  open to abuse and fraud

[7by7]

5 hours ago, vinny41 said:

And your point is that I am biased like you

Yes, I said so several posts back!

 

I hold an opinion; so do you.

 

I am obviously biased toward that opinion; so are you.

 

Why do you find that so surprising?

[vinny41]

13 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

As i said before, if you have a problem with the article using the percentages of those who actually voted, take it up with The New Statesman!

Who cares about percentages I don't but I do know 286 MP voting for May deal is a higher number than the 268 voting for a  2nd referendum May deal vote had 18 more MP's than the 2nd referendum deal vote

[7by7]

2 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

I will repeat myself a petition site  is  open to abuse and fraud

I repeat, the link you provided says not; ok to be 100% accurate, not to any significant degree.