I have come to the conclusion that we have to develop our arguments so that they grab people's attention and force them to think.

If someone makes a false claim about first past the post we must correct them if they make an argument in favour of first past the post we must counter them and if is something is absurd we should say it's absurd.

I am starting right here with two quotes from Schedule 2 of the Parliamentary Constituencies Act 1986 (still in force).

"...a Boundary Commission may depart from the strict application of rule 4 if it appears to them that a departure is desirable to avoid an excessive disparity between the electorate of any constituency and the electoral quota, or between the electorate of any constituency and that of neighbouring constituencies in the part of the United Kingdom with which they are concerned"

[Rough Translation: We know that first past the post is even more unfair when the constituencies don't all have the same number of voters. We also know that this is practically impossible to achieve.]

"The number of constituencies in Northern Ireland shall not be greater than 18 or less than 16, and shall be 17 unless it appears to the Boundary Commission for Northern Ireland that Northern Ireland should for the time being be divided into 16 or (as the case may be) into 18 constituencies."

[Rough Translation: We know that first past the post is even more unfair when the constituencies don't all have the same number of voters but we would really rather you didn't change the number of constituencies in Northern Ireland]