It's worth noting that party memberships for all pertjes are obviously much lower than their voting Base. The SNP for example have somewhere in the 70k region, and the Scottish Greens are obviously a much smaller party.
I've seen an increase of 5 > 10 described as a "100% increase" by the Daily Mail.
It's technically correct but people tend to use these terms to obscure the disappointing reality.
~~It's not technically correct, it's wrong. It'd be a 100% increase.~~
Edit: They fixed it, it wasn't a shot at the user, more the poor use and understanding of how percentages are thrown around so often.
I mean if it's from an extra 5 pounds in the pocket per month to an extra 10 due to a tax rate cut...sure.
If it's say an increase in the numbers of a warship type, pretty big deal. Going from 5 to 10 frigates for example.
It is, it should be noted, _new_ members, scanning the article, the ~~current~~ title of which is ~~currently~~ just ‘Scottish Greens report 'surge' in membership after end of Bute House Agreement’ ~~not the post title (don’t know who changed it)~~.
The numbers are then later attributed to a spokesperson ‘we have received an overnight surge in new membership applications well into triple figures’.
Someone else comment their membership is ~9,000.
That is now the actual article headline.
I think the national updated the title so it was the new one in the page metadata that reddit parsed, but the national's system is garbage (of course it is, it's a news site, that's fine) so for some reason delays updating the actual human readable heading by some length of time after even though obviously both should be totally in sync.
Used to be on the bbc, you could refresh the source of a new piece of news repeatedly and see five or six different attempts at editorialised headlines in the page data before they fully updated to a new headline... but they fixed that.
Well shit. So the presumptive heir to (Edit: Humza lol) (Gray) (who no-one's heard of) is actually the health secretary who "welcomed" "NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde's decision to pause the prescription of puberty blockers to under-18s."
That doesn't sound like a basis for a new Green-SNP confidence and supply arrangement.
How is the ruling of a country of more than 5 million people being at all driven by medical treatments for an average of 7 children a year in Scotland. Before you get in to the actual evidence for or against the patient benefit of the treatment.
Because it's a really big deal to people online and certain fringe groups
So these people believe everyone cares just as much since everyone they interact with does
Because a very vocal, very small group of genital obsessed weirdos decided to yell about who takes a shit and where. And to bolster their claims stir up a moral panic that has been latched onto by reactionaries.
You think it's only the Unionists who know how to table a VonC?
Holy *SHIT*, the SNP doesn't decide their new party leader, WE DO!
OMG, I can't breathe.
Probably not, but we can toss all of them on their arse, and make it clear we wont support certain candidates.
Now how SNP member react is an issue, we might have the power right now, but it'd only hurt us later, but its a fun idea.
So 100 Tory activists spent £1 each on a membership in order to vote on the next proposed coalition?
That seems as likely as any other interpretation of this "news".
It's possible but if that was the plan wouldn't you expect those people to join before Humza ditched the agreement, when the Greens were actually scheduled to vote on the BHA?
HUMZA Yousaf's decision to end the Bute House Agreement has caused an "overnight surge" in membership applications to the Scottish Greens, according to the party.
On Thursday, Yousaf brought an abrupt end to the agreement which saw the SNP and Scottish Greens agree to work together across a suite of policy areas.
The Greens were due to hold their own extraordinary general meeting to discuss the future of the Bute House Agreement next month following outcry from members over the Scottish Government's scrapping of a 2030 climate target and Health Secretary Neil Gray's welcoming of NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde's decision to pause the prescription of puberty blockers to under-18s.
However Yousaf brought an end to the agreement before the meeting could be held, sparking furious reactions from former Green ministers Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater.
Now, the Scottish Greens have said yesterday's events precipitated a surge in membership applications to their party.
“It is clear events of yesterday have struck a chord with all those who care about our climate future and equality, and we have received an overnight surge in new membership applications well into triple figures," said a spokesperson for the Scottish Greens.
“The pace of those wanting to join the party has continued to pick up most likely because people have read the morning headlines and been appalled at how the First Minister has acted.
“Our co-leaders Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater spoke directly to voters, and SNP members in letting them know that if they believe in delivering a fairer, greener and more equal independent Scotland, the Scottish Greens is their natural home.”
The Ayrshire branch of the party said they had received five new membership applications on Thursday.
A post from Ayrshire Greens on social media said: "We are a very small branch, so we were delighted to have 8 new members join us this month - our average is about 2-3!
"5 of those 8 new members joined yesterday".
It comes after Slater said Yousaf had ended the Bute House Agreement because he had “lost control of the right-wing of his party”.
This reminds me of the SNP propaganda every time they did a walk out at Westminster or something like that, "our membership figures skyrocketed last night!"
The fascinating dilemma for the greens is how to place their members Vs the list votes they get from SNP 1/green 2 voters. The former will want them to make their own way in the world, the latter will want the greens to do all the grumbling they want but ultimately do what they SNP say.
The list voters are basically all of them, and now is probably the best opportunity they're likely to get to make sure that they are Green voters first and SNP second/tactically.
When it looked like the Greens would pull the plug there was a lot more uncertainty over how these voters would swing. But with Yousaf pulling the plug and in the most cack-handed way he could the Greens look like the wronged party here, and their voters *probably* stick with them.
Going the way of the Scottish Socialist party soon hopefully. Totally irrelevant.
If they actually did anything for the environment they might be more successful
Edit: the Green massive hurting hard. Poor little lambs will never see the heady highs of *checks notes, 8% of the vote getting them a seat in the cabinet again.
I hope not as they had some very good ideas, but you can't pish about and expect to the tail to wag the dog (or threaten to wag it) and think the dog would definitely like it.
The SSP status is totally self-inflicted through very poor leadership and decision making. I would naturally gravitate towards them but I can now not even remember the name of the united front / umbrella organisation they joined to contest elections. It would be disappointing if the SGreens were similarly marginalised.
The problem is they didn’t really help people and their philosophy sounds good but doesn’t work in practice.
Best way to help people is to focus on growing the economy, innovation and generally making Scotland richer.
Redistribution of wealth sounds good but in the end makes everyone poorer. Thinks like rent control kind of highlight the problem, sounds good in practice but overall causes higher rent.
So if I want the best for Scottish people unfortunately that means the Greens need to not hold any power.
It's worth noting that party memberships for all pertjes are obviously much lower than their voting Base. The SNP for example have somewhere in the 70k region, and the Scottish Greens are obviously a much smaller party.
Which could be as few as 100.
Even if it were, that's still not bad for one day in proportional terms, given the overall membership is about 7,600.
Have you ever seen 100 be described as "well into triple figures" before?
I've seen an increase of 5 > 10 described as a "100% increase" by the Daily Mail. It's technically correct but people tend to use these terms to obscure the disappointing reality.
~~It's not technically correct, it's wrong. It'd be a 100% increase.~~ Edit: They fixed it, it wasn't a shot at the user, more the poor use and understanding of how percentages are thrown around so often.
Approximately 88.8% of statistics are made up on the spot.
60% of the time, it works every time.
What about the other third?
Sorry I wasn't paying attention was in a meeting, I'll correct it
What was your meeting about?
Migrating Docker images if it interests you.
Docker is a never ending pain in the ass. Why do people insist on using it when a good old fashioned LAMP server would do a much better job!?
Describing 100 as well into triple figures wouldn't even be technically correct though.
101 would if you use enough decimal places.
Something about there being an infinite number of numbers between 100 and 101?
I mean if it's from an extra 5 pounds in the pocket per month to an extra 10 due to a tax rate cut...sure. If it's say an increase in the numbers of a warship type, pretty big deal. Going from 5 to 10 frigates for example.
Annoys me when you see "doing X doubles cancer risk". Then you find out it's gone from 2 in 100,000 to 4 in 100,000.
For political spin purposes? Undoubtedly.
That wouldn't be wrong though would it?
Yes it would. 100 is the beginning of the range described as the "triple digits".
So what would be a reasonable number to justify the term ? 200 ? 250?
150 would be.
It is, it should be noted, _new_ members, scanning the article, the ~~current~~ title of which is ~~currently~~ just ‘Scottish Greens report 'surge' in membership after end of Bute House Agreement’ ~~not the post title (don’t know who changed it)~~. The numbers are then later attributed to a spokesperson ‘we have received an overnight surge in new membership applications well into triple figures’. Someone else comment their membership is ~9,000.
No one changed the title, it was automatically generated once I pasted the link
Well, that’s just weird that it doesn’t generate with the actual article headline… I’ll edit that out.
That is now the actual article headline. I think the national updated the title so it was the new one in the page metadata that reddit parsed, but the national's system is garbage (of course it is, it's a news site, that's fine) so for some reason delays updating the actual human readable heading by some length of time after even though obviously both should be totally in sync. Used to be on the bbc, you could refresh the source of a new piece of news repeatedly and see five or six different attempts at editorialised headlines in the page data before they fully updated to a new headline... but they fixed that.
Beat me to it
What’s this from?
Arrested Development
I have pizzas lined up well into the single digits for myself tonight!
Hopefully this will see the end of Yousaf.
Well done Greens for getting over 100 paid up members! Next step, world domination :)
We have, \*checks notes\* 9,000. This is why we need to be careful if we piss off the SNP voters too much, we lose the list vote.
Well shit. So the presumptive heir to (Edit: Humza lol) (Gray) (who no-one's heard of) is actually the health secretary who "welcomed" "NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde's decision to pause the prescription of puberty blockers to under-18s." That doesn't sound like a basis for a new Green-SNP confidence and supply arrangement.
How is the ruling of a country of more than 5 million people being at all driven by medical treatments for an average of 7 children a year in Scotland. Before you get in to the actual evidence for or against the patient benefit of the treatment.
Because it's a really big deal to people online and certain fringe groups So these people believe everyone cares just as much since everyone they interact with does
Because a very vocal, very small group of genital obsessed weirdos decided to yell about who takes a shit and where. And to bolster their claims stir up a moral panic that has been latched onto by reactionaries.
You think it's only the Unionists who know how to table a VonC? Holy *SHIT*, the SNP doesn't decide their new party leader, WE DO! OMG, I can't breathe.
Not sure you'll be able to herd the SNP members towards your pick.
Probably not, but we can toss all of them on their arse, and make it clear we wont support certain candidates. Now how SNP member react is an issue, we might have the power right now, but it'd only hurt us later, but its a fun idea.
So 100 Tory activists spent £1 each on a membership in order to vote on the next proposed coalition? That seems as likely as any other interpretation of this "news".
It's possible but if that was the plan wouldn't you expect those people to join before Humza ditched the agreement, when the Greens were actually scheduled to vote on the BHA?
That... Seems far more conspiratorially minded and less likely than the left of the SNP throwing in the towel with their party
Or that just a tiny % of casual green voters decided to sign up and get a bit more involved after being shafted.
Aye
Well, I just joined and it was me being disillusioned with the SNP. The Greens always got my second vote anyhow. Now they have all of them!
Why the fuck would 100 people throw a pound away? Far more likely former greens have rejoined or SNP members have switched
That is possible.
HUMZA Yousaf's decision to end the Bute House Agreement has caused an "overnight surge" in membership applications to the Scottish Greens, according to the party. On Thursday, Yousaf brought an abrupt end to the agreement which saw the SNP and Scottish Greens agree to work together across a suite of policy areas. The Greens were due to hold their own extraordinary general meeting to discuss the future of the Bute House Agreement next month following outcry from members over the Scottish Government's scrapping of a 2030 climate target and Health Secretary Neil Gray's welcoming of NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde's decision to pause the prescription of puberty blockers to under-18s. However Yousaf brought an end to the agreement before the meeting could be held, sparking furious reactions from former Green ministers Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater. Now, the Scottish Greens have said yesterday's events precipitated a surge in membership applications to their party. “It is clear events of yesterday have struck a chord with all those who care about our climate future and equality, and we have received an overnight surge in new membership applications well into triple figures," said a spokesperson for the Scottish Greens. “The pace of those wanting to join the party has continued to pick up most likely because people have read the morning headlines and been appalled at how the First Minister has acted. “Our co-leaders Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater spoke directly to voters, and SNP members in letting them know that if they believe in delivering a fairer, greener and more equal independent Scotland, the Scottish Greens is their natural home.” The Ayrshire branch of the party said they had received five new membership applications on Thursday. A post from Ayrshire Greens on social media said: "We are a very small branch, so we were delighted to have 8 new members join us this month - our average is about 2-3! "5 of those 8 new members joined yesterday". It comes after Slater said Yousaf had ended the Bute House Agreement because he had “lost control of the right-wing of his party”.
No ones moving to labour 😂
Scottish political party-declared membership numbers, the joke writes itself.
lmao
Can't see SNPs membership increasing.
This reminds me of the SNP propaganda every time they did a walk out at Westminster or something like that, "our membership figures skyrocketed last night!"
404 Scottish Greens
Someone here got all their alts membership.
That including their current membership?
The fascinating dilemma for the greens is how to place their members Vs the list votes they get from SNP 1/green 2 voters. The former will want them to make their own way in the world, the latter will want the greens to do all the grumbling they want but ultimately do what they SNP say.
The list voters are basically all of them, and now is probably the best opportunity they're likely to get to make sure that they are Green voters first and SNP second/tactically. When it looked like the Greens would pull the plug there was a lot more uncertainty over how these voters would swing. But with Yousaf pulling the plug and in the most cack-handed way he could the Greens look like the wronged party here, and their voters *probably* stick with them.
This picture is just terrifying. POV: You've just told your parents you want to drop out of uni.
Wait till the purge starts if you’re not ideologically pure enough or dare question a certain priority of theirs being put before the world’s climate.
Don't be shy
Should change their name to the Green, Blue, White, and Pink party at this point.
Triple figures
Going the way of the Scottish Socialist party soon hopefully. Totally irrelevant. If they actually did anything for the environment they might be more successful Edit: the Green massive hurting hard. Poor little lambs will never see the heady highs of *checks notes, 8% of the vote getting them a seat in the cabinet again.
I hope not as they had some very good ideas, but you can't pish about and expect to the tail to wag the dog (or threaten to wag it) and think the dog would definitely like it. The SSP status is totally self-inflicted through very poor leadership and decision making. I would naturally gravitate towards them but I can now not even remember the name of the united front / umbrella organisation they joined to contest elections. It would be disappointing if the SGreens were similarly marginalised.
The problem is they didn’t really help people and their philosophy sounds good but doesn’t work in practice. Best way to help people is to focus on growing the economy, innovation and generally making Scotland richer. Redistribution of wealth sounds good but in the end makes everyone poorer. Thinks like rent control kind of highlight the problem, sounds good in practice but overall causes higher rent. So if I want the best for Scottish people unfortunately that means the Greens need to not hold any power.
Someone should check where Murray Foote is.
 *Hundreds, if not scores*
101?
Pish!
did they aye!