23rd March - ?Put It To The People March? - central London

[esme]

Petition now at 4.1 million- amazing!

Good for you anyone marching today!!

[Jules-and-Boo]

If nothing else - it should highlight the fact that this government has let the completely failed in meeting its obligations to the people.

We have reduced investment in education, police, NHS; a benefits system run by a company (who have a mission to make profit), fmailies who cannot survive without food banks, huge house prices due to the ease at which foreign investors can buy up stock - people who cannot afford to buy/ rent/ live, job cuts....

It goes on.

TM is one part of this failure. The rest of the government should hang their heads in total shame.

This is one final opportunity for them to turn this around.

The People's March should be looking at more fundamental changes than to get a A50 cancellation. That's really, really nto going to happen. The focus should be on rebuilding the pillars of this country - and starting with an overhaul of what this government are doing with it.

[zerkalo]

So good to be part of this demo today. Check this footage out. Estimated 1m people took part. Incredible!

https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1109502078005714945/video/1

[teddyboy23]

Yawn

[malumbu]

And your view Mr/Ms/BTQ Teddy? Pray tell, I'd be most interested. How do you think this will all pan out? Are you throbbing hard, flaccid soft, or simply impotent (that the original definition - unable to take effective action; helpless or powerless.

[Seabag]

teddyboy23 Wrote:

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

> Yawn

I think ted?s tired from Nigel?s march.

Come on Ted, only a few more days until the grand finale.

[teddyboy23]

Let's see ms / Mrs/Mr/ malumbu yawn what happens yawn next even bigger yawn.PS as for throbbing hard no promblem

[teddyboy23]

Sea bag I was up all night making the sandwich's

[robbin]

zerkalo Wrote:

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

> So good to be part of this demo today. Check this

> footage out. Estimated 1m people took part.

> Incredible!

>

>

> 05714945/video/1

Actually it has been estimated that between 312,000 and 400,000 were there - not 1 million

[Sue]

robbin Wrote:

>

>

> Actually it has been estimated that between

> 312,000 and 400,000 were there - not 1 million

Estimated by who?

[carlafindle]

People with poor eyesight (unfortunately)

[robbin]

Sue Wrote:

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

> robbin Wrote:

>

> >

> >

> > Actually it has been estimated that between

> > 312,000 and 400,000 were there - not 1 million

>

>

> Estimated by who?

Independent fact checking charity (FullFact) using experts in crowd estimation.

https://fullfact.org/europe/peoples-vote-march-count/?utm_source=homepage&utm_medium=main_story

Don't know about their eyesight.

[robbin]

carlafindle Wrote:

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

> People with poor eyesight (unfortunately)

Or maybe the organisers (no vested interest there!) used the Trump method of crowd estimation?

[Sue]

Surely there must be some objective independent estimate?

[robbin]

Yes - I just gave you the link! Here's another.

https://fullfact.org/about/

[Sue]

robbin Wrote:

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

> Yes - I just gave you the link! Here's another.

>

> https://fullfact.org/about/

That doesn't give any figures?

[robbin]

Not sure what page you are looking at - this is a small part cut and pasted from the link...

Claim

An estimated 1 million people marched for a People?s Vote on Saturday 23rd March.

Conclusion

It?s impossible to say with precision how many people attended the march. However experts in crowd estimation put the number at between 312,000 and 400,000.

[robbin]

And this...

Manchester Metropolitan University?s Professor Keith Still, said ?based on the visuals from the helicopter image, it?s between 312,000 and 400,000 people.?

This type of crowd estimation, called the Jacobs method, is done by dividing a crowd site area into sections, measuring the size of each section and then multiplying each area by the estimated density of people within that subsection.

How did the People?s Vote estimate 1 million?

The People?s Vote said they estimated the size of the crowd using information from staff and volunteers as well as examining aerial pictures from helicopters.

They said that ?peak crowd densities were estimated at 4.5 people per square metre?. (For context: Professor Still says the average crowd has between two and four people standing per square metre, and anything more than four people per square metre becomes too uncomfortable to move).

But even if this density of 4.5 people per square metre (visualised below) had been observed across the whole march site of roughly 160,000 square metres, that would only account for 700,000 people.

[civilservant]

prof still's calculations are based on static crowds.

for those who have been on these marches, it's really interesting to see the rate of flow

these are dynamic crowds,

in the old days, marchers converged on a central point and then stood around to hear speeches

but no longer - the new style marchers turn out to be counted and then leave, making way for more people to flow into the space they have left - otherwise the numbers could never be accommodated in central london

the other interesting thing is how peaceful they are, these marches - no pushing, shoving or gilets jaunes, minimal police presence and not a broken window in sight

[robbin]

I rather suspect they realise that (being crowd estimating experts)!

[robbin]

Good that it was peaceful though. There were some very funny signs.

[robbin]

I fear it won't be so peaceful though if the will of the majority is ignored and the promises to carry out the referendum result are broken. Careful what you wish for!

[Sue]

civilservant Wrote:

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

> prof still's calculations are based on static

> crowds.

> for those who have been on these marches, it's

> really interesting to see the rate of flow

>

> these are dynamic crowds,

> in the old days, marchers converged on a central

> point and then stood around to hear speeches

> but no longer - the new style marchers turn out to

> be counted and then leave, making way for more

> people to flow into the space they have left -

> otherwise the numbers could never be accommodated

> in central london

>

> the other interesting thing is how peaceful they

> are, these marches - no pushing, shoving or gilets

> jaunes, minimal police presence and not a broken

> window in sight

Yep.

We were with a group of people (including Helen Hayes) who joined the march at Green Park (he park, not the tube station) having started at Victoria.

There was a bottleneck of people trying to get out of Green Park into Piccadilly.

We got down to the screen in the Mall but couldn't get much further due to the crowds, so never got as far as Parliament Square.

And yes, there was no trouble at all, it was a really good natured and lovely day, we met some lovely people, including people who had come a really long way (felt a bit bad we just had quite a short journey there!)

[Jenny1]

robbin Wrote:

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

> I fear it won't be so peaceful though if the will

> of the majority is ignored and the promises to

> carry out the referendum result are broken.

> Careful what you wish for!

I think panic about this is over-played. Just because Teresa May has spent the past two and a half years attempting to brainwash the country into believing that a 'full suicide' Brexit is the only way to honour a narrow majority in an advisory referendum offering no concrete vision of 'Leave', doesn't mean that anyone believes her. MPs are now, thank the Lord, taking some kind of initiative to examine the many options available. My question is : since it was obvious the day after the referendum that such a collaborative, cross-party approach was needed to work out a sensible way forward, why couldn't the government see that? I think we all know that's because their main concern was keeping hold of power, not what was best for the county.

[Jenny1]

Sue Wrote:

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

> civilservant Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > prof still's calculations are based on static

> > crowds.

> > for those who have been on these marches, it's

> > really interesting to see the rate of flow

> >

> > these are dynamic crowds,

> > in the old days, marchers converged on a

> central

> > point and then stood around to hear speeches

> > but no longer - the new style marchers turn out

> to

> > be counted and then leave, making way for more

> > people to flow into the space they have left -

> > otherwise the numbers could never be

> accommodated

> > in central london

> >

> > the other interesting thing is how peaceful

> they

> > are, these marches - no pushing, shoving or

> gilets

> > jaunes, minimal police presence and not a

> broken

> > window in sight

>

>

> Yep.

>

> We were with a group of people (including Helen

> Hayes) who joined the march at Green Park (he

> park, not the tube station) having started at

> Victoria.

>

> There was a bottleneck of people trying to get out

> of Green Park into Piccadilly.

>

> We got down to the screen in the Mall but couldn't

> get much further due to the crowds, so never got

> as far as Parliament Square.

>

> And yes, there was no trouble at all, it was a

> really good natured and lovely day, we met some

> lovely people, including people who had come a

> really long way (felt a bit bad we just had quite

> a short journey there!)

I felt bad about that too. But I'm jolly glad I went!