Do you indulge in digital self harm?

[GreenMirror]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/artic...f-eecd47d7dfd7

US research from 2017 found that approximately 6% of students aged 12 to 17 had sent themselves anonymous hate, with boys more likely to engage in the behaviour than girls and LGBT students nearly three times more likely to self-cyberbully.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of course I don't you idiot.

[Old Greg]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/artic...f-eecd47d7dfd7

US research from 2017 found that approximately 6% of students aged 12 to 17 had sent themselves anonymous hate, with boys more likely to engage in the behaviour than girls and LGBT students nearly three times more likely to self-cyberbully.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of course I don't you idiot.

52% of the British electorate may recognise this type of behaviour.

[MarillionFan]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/artic...f-eecd47d7dfd7

US research from 2017 found that approximately 6% of students aged 12 to 17 had sent themselves anonymous hate, with boys more likely to engage in the behaviour than girls and LGBT students nearly three times more likely to self-cyberbully.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of course I don't you idiot.

Nah, I just send the messages to others.

[Zigenare]

52% of the British electorate may recognise this type of behaviour.

Whereas the other 48% do nothing but whinge about a democratic process that they obviously don't understand - because it doesn't suit!

[original PM]

'He was engaging in ‘digital self-harm’ - the act of secretly sending yourself hurtful messages online.'

What the fook????

[greenlake]

Do you indulge in digital self harm?

[Dark Black]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/artic...f-eecd47d7dfd7

US research from 2017 found that approximately 6% of students aged 12 to 17 had sent themselves anonymous hate, with boys more likely to engage in the behaviour than girls and LGBT students nearly three times more likely to self-cyberbully.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of course I don't you idiot.

Millennials...

[rogerfederer]

Whereas the other 48% do nothing but whinge about a democratic process that they obviously don't understand - because it doesn't suit!

It was an advisory referendum. Any party in power, or who came to power, would be within their rights to view it as too close to call.

If you believe in democracy you would question the advisory nature of it. Why was it not a binding referendum? The real question to ask is why was this detail intentionally made. It is very strange.

If joining the EU on limited terms is an advisory referendum in future, this would be just that - purely advisory. The weird thing about this whole scenario is that the margin was so close, it was advisory, and now we are heading towards an unknown target.

Referenda should always be binding to avoid this situation. At the core of democracy is such a choice. If someone advised me 52% of people voted one way and 48% another way in an advisory referendum, I would suggest the people were almost split down the middle in opinions. If it was a binding referendum, then tough, it should progress regardless.

You are claiming you wish for democracy to be upheld, but if you think carefully it is actually being subverted by the choice of a particular government in power choosing to head down a path based on a very narrowly contested advisory referendum. Democracy, in this case, should be regardless of the government in power. This is why binding referenda exist.

[Lance]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/artic...f-eecd47d7dfd7

US research from 2017 found that approximately 6% of students aged 12 to 17 had sent themselves anonymous hate, with boys more likely to engage in the behaviour than girls and LGBT students nearly three times more likely to self-cyberbully.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of course I don't you idiot.

digital self harm by proxy == posting stupid questions on CUK (preferably in general for maximum harm)

[Zigenare]

It was an advisory referendum. Any party in power, or who came to power, would be within their rights to view it as too close to call.

If you believe in democracy you would question the advisory nature of it. Why was it not a binding referendum? The real question to ask is why was this detail intentionally made. It is very strange.

If joining the EU on limited terms is an advisory referendum in future, this would be just that - purely advisory. The weird thing about this whole scenario is that the margin was so close, it was advisory, and now we are heading towards an unknown target.

Referenda should always be binding to avoid this situation. At the core of democracy is such a choice. If someone advised me 52% of people voted one way and 48% another way in an advisory referendum, I would suggest the people were almost split down the middle in opinions. If it was a binding referendum, then tough, it should progress regardless.

You are claiming you wish for democracy to be upheld, but if you think carefully it is actually being subverted by the choice of a particular government in power choosing to head down a path based on a very narrowly contested advisory referendum. Democracy, in this case, should be regardless of the government in power. This is why binding referenda exist.

Read the figures.

United Kingdom European Union membership referendum
Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?
Location United Kingdom
Gibraltar
Date 23 June 2016
Results
Votes %
Leave 17,410,742 51.89%
Remain 16,141,241 48.11%
Valid votes 33,551,983 99.92%
Invalid or blank votes 25,359 0.08%
Total votes 33,577,342 100.00%
Registered voters/turnout 46,500,001 72.21%

A 1,269,501 vote majority is a lot of votes and not "too close to call".