The New Fat Scotland 'Thanks for all the Fish' Thread.

TrickyTree83

elantan wrote: »

Not to worry I imagine the Msp's etc will be very aware of what some of the posters on here are up to as well as the possibility others may be doing the same ... the fact I've informed some Mp's and Msp's and counsellors would indicate to me they are now aware

Good, tell them to sack their IT consultants.

Perhaps suggest that they link the survey to government gateway ID's.

Since the survey is online it's reasonable to assume people have used the internet for driving licence renewals or address changes, or notifications to HMRC. Which require a government gateway ID which requires a several step ID verification.

Whoever thought postal code, forename, surname would be enough is amateur at best.

Not that they can do much about it now, they've launched it.

Unless they take it down, re-hash the idea and re-launch the best they can hope for is to cross-reference with the electoral roll and hope they can match 1-1 cardinality. If they need to de-duplicate because multiple people from the same address with the same name have submitted different results, it's going to be a pain in the bum and near impossible to determine the true individual.

elantan

I dare say if it was such a vital piece of info they wouod have done all that ... seeing as it's not really and just a listening exercise that doesn't matter too much ... but it is handy to be made aware of possible attempts at sabotage

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Good, tell them to sack their IT consultants.

Perhaps suggest that they link the survey to government gateway ID's.

Since the survey is online it's reasonable to assume people have used the internet for driving licence renewals or address changes, or notifications to HMRC. Which require a government gateway ID which requires a several step ID verification.

Whoever thought postal code, forename, surname would be enough is amateur at best.

Not that they can do much about it now, they've launched it.

Unless they take it down, re-hash the idea and re-launch the best they can hope for is to cross-reference with the electoral roll and hope they can match 1-1 cardinality. If they need to de-duplicate because multiple people from the same address with the same name have submitted different results, it's going to be a pain in the bum and near impossible to determine the true individual.

They're also sending out packs to their 120,000 members to use on the ground and asking them to fan out over Scotland filling them in. The survey isn't just online.

They have their own internal voter id system which they use while canvassing.

Shakethedisease

Greens are launching their campaign too.

THE SCOTTISH GREEN PARTY will relaunch its campaign for independence next month at its party conference in Perth. The Greens, a key part of the 2014 Yes alliance, believe that the vote for Brexit and the breakdown of politics at Westminster represent an opportunity to make a new case for self-government.
The Scottish Greens quadrupled its membership after the independence referendum, then won six MSPs in the 2016 Scottish election, becoming the fourth biggest party in parliament.
A party spokesperson told CommonSpace: “Ahead of our conference next month (Perth, 21-23 Oct) we will announce to our members proposals for relaunching the Green Yes campaign.

https://www.commonspace.scot/articles/9233/scottish-green-party-relaunch-its-campaign-independence

TrickyTree83

Shakethedisease wrote: »

They're also sending out packs to their 120,000 members to use on the ground and asking them to fan out over Scotland filling them in. The survey isn't just online.

They have their own internal voter id system which they use while canvassing.

Sorry but I'm pretty sure you won't be able to determine a P Smith in Aberdeen who filled that survey in as a unionist from a P Smith in Aberdeen in the same postal code who filled it in supporting independence.

Email addresses change all the time, it's not a useful piece of ID verification data.

On the ground is a different matter, not the one I was addressing.

elantan

Oooo David Davis has came out with some fighting talk ... looks like it's gonna be indy ref 2 then

CLAPTON

a wast of time and money (hopefully SNP or at least scots)

just one question is necessary : indepencence YES or NO

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Sorry but I'm pretty sure you won't be able to determine a P Smith in Aberdeen who filled that survey in as a unionist from a P Smith in Aberdeen in the same postal code who filled it in supporting independence.

Email addresses change all the time, it's not a useful piece of ID verification data.

On the ground is a different matter, not the one I was addressing.

Look take it as you like. The Conservatives did similar at the recent Holyrood election and this is a version of that, but concerning independence. The Survey is online, all over twitter, all over facebook and soon will be all over Scotland as grassroots activists start chapping doors and talking to family and friends.

At worst it's a good trial run for any future referendum. At best it gives the next Yes campaign a solid basis to build on in terms of who is and who isn't 1) already a firm yes 2 ) already a firm no 3) worth having a chat with. It also scores concerns out of 10 for a picture of what the next campaign should focus on in terms of messages.

Is just the starting gun.

TrickyTree83

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Look take it as you like. The Conservatives did similar at the recent Holyrood election and this is a version of that, but concerning independence. The Survey is online, all over twitter, all over facebook and soon will be all over Scotland as grassroots activists start chapping doors and talking to family and friends.

At worst it's a good trial run for any future referendum. At best it gives the next Yes campaign a solid basis to build on in terms of who is and who isn't 1) already a firm yes 2 ) already a firm no 3) worth having a chat with. It also scores concerns out of 10 for a picture of what the next campaign should focus on in terms of messages.

Is just the starting gun.

I fully understood that and accepted it.

My issue is that it is open to fraud, not only from unionists, or people from the Philippines, but from independence supporters also.

If this is going to be a true sounding out, there must be some way of establishing the uniqueness of the individual submitting their response.

It doesn't bode well that it is easily flawed.

I'm surprised you don't hold the same concern given your commitment to the assertion that GERS is flawed.

Edit: No offence to anyone from the Philippines, it was purely to demonstrate that you need not be in the UK in order to fill in this survey if you have access to a UK based VPN. Essentially anyone in the world could fill this survey in.

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

I fully understood that and accepted it.

My issue is that it is open to fraud, not only from unionists, or people from the Philippines, but from independence supporters also.

If this is going to be a true sounding out, there must be some way of establishing the uniqueness of the individual submitting their response.

It doesn't bode well that it is easily flawed.

I'm surprised you don't hold the same concern given your commitment to the assertion that GERS is flawed.

This very targeted approach worked for the Conservatives in May.

I work online running a forum of my own, so I know all about false emails etc. I'm sure the SNP have techs that are far advanced than I am at weeding them out. All political parties have their own means of id'ing real live voters according to area, occupation etc etc. I'm sure this will be fed into that alongside the registered voters list.

I really doubt false id's are much of a concern when checked against the electoral roll.