[thread]

As we approach "the last throw of the dice"

I would like to do something I haven’t done enough of

Congratulations to 37.4% of the electorate

On the 23rd June 2016 you won

Congratulations

No one can take that away from you

You

Indeed I would like to be the first one to congratulate Boris Johnson

Whatever happens in the next few days

Well done Boris

Whether he gets as a deal

Or indeed no deal

Congratulations on the "win"
You will desperately sell what you won was a "win"

If a deal then with a sale of a side measure of scapegoating narrative as to why it wasn't better

If no deal then the side sale will be the scapegoating as to why
As it will always be someone else's fault

Can I firstly apologise - its obviously because I didn't believe enough or talked the country down
I am not certain which will be sold more desperately

A really shitty deal

or no deal
So sorry - back to my congratulations to those winners on 23rd June 2016

Not only did you win

But you "got brexit done"

https://t.co/CJwS2mJ7Yy
You can even buy a range of branded items immortalising that event

https://t.co/G2pvk12ASE
And now some four and half years on from that “glorious day”

That day of liberation

Where Britain flung off the shackles of the 4th reich

That EUSSR that has so enfeebled the U.K.

What a four and half years it has been
As we approach the end of the beginning

As Brexit Britain gets ready to reach the 31st December 2020

And sail onwards

Open global buccaneering brexit Britain

It’s eyes raised to the horizon
I want to say again

Congratulations to 37.4% of you

You won
Now I have several questions

And these should be simple for you all to answer

Because you all knew what you were voting for
But first before I start

I want to beg your forgiveness

Because this will be a long thread

I will try to be short

But alas the questions and backdrop are not simple and I try to provide context to why I ask
Oh and also I want to apologise also

As I may use threads within here to illustrate a point

I will try not to overuse subthreads and unweave these to make points

I did consider writing this as a blog post

But I wanted to force myself to keep my points themselves short
How did you win on 23rd June 2016?

What did you win on 23rd June 2016?

How do we move on from 23rd June 2016?
3 simple questions

That’s all
Now I should make it clear

Of the electorate in 23rd June 2016

I voted to remain

I am part of the some 34% of the electorate who voted to remain

As opposed to the 37% who voted leave
I have family and friends who voted to Leave on 23rd June 2016

And I don't think they are stupid

I don't think they are racists

I think they made a choice
And I am sorry

That my simple words to those family and friends over the past 4 years

Have caused them such anger

To me

That they get so angry

And unable to respond to basic points on well reality

Is sad

Sad at what they have been reduced to
You see

There is a simple thing

Is now that Leave "won"

And I "lost"

When I hold up a mirror to the words and promises made

All I am doing is asking you to deliver on what you said this brave new world, these sunlit uplands were going to be
After all

I want my country to get better

I want my country to improve

I want my country to well to borrow a phrase be best

I want my country to level up (although I want to know from what and whom)

(of course obviously according to an Education Secretary) we already are
I am not an elite, not a metropolitan liberal elite, not a remoaner, not an enemy of the people, not a citizen of nowhere, not a saboteur, not a separatist, not a traitor.

I am just a person.
So when I make these observations about brexit

I want it to usher in a new era

Of blue passports

Of British fish

Of "taking back control"

Of that brexit dividend

Of that NI border being solved

Of the glorious sunlit uplands
You said it would be the blessed sunlit uplands

I simply want you to deliver on that promise

That's all
I have never been on any Brexit protest marches

I have never written to my MP (as I know where they stand for what little good they can effect)

I have never signed a petition

I have simple been holding up a mirror to well words.
And yes

If you want to hurl abuse at me

Please do so

Call me a remoaner

Call me a loser

Tell me I am in the pay of Soros

Tell me to stop talking my country down

Tell me to believe more

Thank you

Again for confirming you cannot play the ball
If you want to deride me as a “cyber warrior”

That’s fine

Please do so

Thank you

In doing so you again show you cannot play the ball

A reminder on the Tory 1st Battalion

https://t.co/0Sng2jwJOl
Here’s a reminder on the words of one Abraham Lincoln

“I should regret to see the day in which the people should cease to express intelligent, honest generous criticism upon the policy of their rulers.”
So anyway let’s get started
How did you win?

Now the inspiration for this question

Came from one M. Thatcher

"The manner of winning is a matter of honour."
So I am going to touch on 10 topics

1. Media
2. Franchise
3. Cheating
4. Scapegoating
5. Lies
6. Expertise
7. Simplism
8. Plan
9. Respect
10. NI Border
Just 10 simple topics

Remember my focus is how did you win?

And as I dig into these it will touch on what you won.

These two topics are really quite difficult to separate.

My conclusion to the thread I will touch on how do we move on.
So let's start on those 10 points of how you won and what was won
1. Media

Now the media is always a tough one

As all sides of the spectrum use it as a soft toy to kick around
"THE Brexit campaign has been plagued by little white lies, half-truths and disinformation. Neither side has showered itself in glory in its attempts to persuade the British public of the benefits or drawbacks of EU membership."

https://t.co/lo7wVaQHk1
See also a story from Margaret Thatcher

https://t.co/HKmCfdNzQK
https://t.co/cT8zijNgF2
"Any discussion of propaganda and the 2016 European referendum starts with years of Euromythology and migrant-bashing."

https://t.co/P5M9P11NO8
“I once asked Rupert Murdoch why he was so opposed to the European Union.

“‘That’s easy,’ he replied. ‘When I go into Downing Street they do what I say; when I go to Brussels they take no notice.’

https://t.co/IBLMnTDZyd
Rupert of course rebuts that

“There is much fake news published about me, but let me make clear that I have never uttered those words. I have made it a principle all my life never to ask for anything from any prime minister.”
Now if I accept Rupert at his words

Of course he never has to ask

It is given proferred automatically

https://t.co/YXsNb4to5O
Theresa not his only desperate supplicant

https://t.co/4qex0kqEQZ
"Labor has been subjected to what he calls “a rolling campaign … every story, every edition of every paper”."

https://t.co/PeyRm3K8iX
“This power is routinely used to attack opponents in business & politics by blending editorial opinion with news reporting. Australians who hold contrary views have felt intimidated into silence. These facts chill free speech & undermine public debate.”

https://t.co/WyNe7bYlT2
2. Franchise

Now there are two main areas here where I would flag concern

The first is a promise by the Conservative Party
Their 2015 manifesto

“We will complete the electoral register, by working to include more of the five million Britons who live abroad. We will introduce votes for life, scrapping the rule that bars British citizens who have lived abroad for more than 15 years from voting”
See also Michael Green

Sorry I meant Grant Shapps

https://t.co/wLIzhmxhBs
Now I actually feel sorry for Grant

As he can be the victim of such "unintentional" maligning

https://t.co/rH3euLoU4b
Anyway

Back to that franchise promise

Why would you not honour that promise in time for the 2016 referendum?

Why?

It's a simple question
The second is the vote for 16 - 18 year olds

Now personally

I do not care how 16 - 18 year olds may vote

I want to focus on the principle that they be allowed to vote

https://t.co/6WAoADlr2p
So this is one of two thread breaks

Due to me posting it hastily and bloody breaking the thread

Do continue

https://t.co/aFfBrxFyaA

More from ScottishPanda

Why there was even talk of starving the Irish

But that's ok

Priti only meant it unintentionally

And she was frustrated when she said it

So that's


It's not like the UK talked of invading Spain or Calais

Or was busy trying to incite Irexit, Itexit or the AfD or so other discord in the EU

After all that 50 pence piece

Talks of friendship

So surely we were good friends?

Those liars who had nothing

And knew they had nothing

Well they passed their withdrawal agreement

Knowing they never had any intention of honouring


Oh yes and a reminder

How many Tory MPs are unashamed they passed legislation without forming an opinion on it

More from Brexit

A further thread on the EU/UK musicians/visa for paid work issue (the issue is paid work: travelling to sing or play at eg a charity event for free can be done without a visa).


The position that we now have now (no relevant provisions under the TCA) is complicated. For EU musicians visiting the UK see


In essence the UK permits foreign (including EU) nationals to stay up to 30 days to carry out paid engagements, but they must (a) prove they are a professional musician and (b) be invited by an established UK business.

Either condition could be tricky for a young musician starting out and wanting to play gigs. And 30 days isn’t long enough for a part in a show with a run.

Longer stays require a T5 visa - which generally requires you to be in a shortage occupation (play an instrument not played in the UK?) or to have an established international reputation.

You May Also Like

1/ Here’s a list of conversational frameworks I’ve picked up that have been helpful.

Please add your own.

2/ The Magic Question: "What would need to be true for you


3/ On evaluating where someone’s head is at regarding a topic they are being wishy-washy about or delaying.

“Gun to the head—what would you decide now?”

“Fast forward 6 months after your sabbatical--how would you decide: what criteria is most important to you?”

4/ Other Q’s re: decisions:

“Putting aside a list of pros/cons, what’s the *one* reason you’re doing this?” “Why is that the most important reason?”

“What’s end-game here?”

“What does success look like in a world where you pick that path?”

5/ When listening, after empathizing, and wanting to help them make their own decisions without imposing your world view:

“What would the best version of yourself do”?
A brief analysis and comparison of the CSS for Twitter's PWA vs Twitter's legacy desktop website. The difference is dramatic and I'll touch on some reasons why.

Legacy site *downloads* ~630 KB CSS per theme and writing direction.

6,769 rules
9,252 selectors
16.7k declarations
3,370 unique declarations
44 media queries
36 unique colors
50 unique background colors
46 unique font sizes
39 unique z-indices

https://t.co/qyl4Bt1i5x


PWA *incrementally generates* ~30 KB CSS that handles all themes and writing directions.

735 rules
740 selectors
757 declarations
730 unique declarations
0 media queries
11 unique colors
32 unique background colors
15 unique font sizes
7 unique z-indices

https://t.co/w7oNG5KUkJ


The legacy site's CSS is what happens when hundreds of people directly write CSS over many years. Specificity wars, redundancy, a house of cards that can't be fixed. The result is extremely inefficient and error-prone styling that punishes users and developers.

The PWA's CSS is generated on-demand by a JS framework that manages styles and outputs "atomic CSS". The framework can enforce strict constraints and perform optimisations, which is why the CSS is so much smaller and safer. Style conflicts and unbounded CSS growth are avoided.
"I lied about my basic beliefs in order to keep a prestigious job. Now that it will be zero-cost to me, I have a few things to say."


We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.

Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)

It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.

Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".