Jump to content

?Rob da Bank? ? robbed of imagination?

kanga

By kanga
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

kanga

kanga

Posted
Posted

So Rob da Bank says in one of this evening?s freesheets that he likes living in East Dulwich as there are ?not too many suits?.


Judging someone by their occupation (or dress for that matter) is lazy social shorthand at best, and more likely just plain prejudice (Occupationalism? Dressism?)


So piss off, you crusty. I?m tired of seeing you in that stinky rainbow-striped sweater every time you manage to claw a few inches in the press. Those ?suits? are probably the very same demographic that are tuned in to your middle-of-the-road choonz, man.


And while I?m at it, what a banal, idiotic choice of pseudonym. Let?s hope your kids don?t inherit your narrow-mindedness and lack of imagination.


Rant over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Horsebox

Horsebox

Posted
Posted
Didn't know he was local. I wonder if he'll give me a lift to Bestival this year? Also, any chance of a free programme? I thought charging ?5 for them was a pisstake at least, after the not so cheap ticket price and the rain. Can't you do anything about the rain, rob?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark

Mark

Posted
Posted

Let me guess kanga, you wear a suit? In fact, are you a suit? And he said he liked it because "There are not too many suits", not because "There are not any suits" there's subtle difference.


And having a go at someone (who you have to admit is pretty good and successful even without a suit) because of their name is rather stupid. I'm going out on a limb here, are you an estate agent?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mick Mac

Mick Mac

Posted
Posted
even i have heard of him. But did not know what he did. Good that he is local. I agree ed does not have many suits. I have to wear one but im glad most people here do not have to otherwise ed would prob not have the the character it has. So i agree with rob da banker.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
flapjackdavey

flapjackdavey

Posted
Posted

kanga Wrote:

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

> So Rob da Bank says in one of this evening?s

> freesheets that he likes living in East Dulwich as

> there are ?not too many suits?.

>

> Judging someone by their occupation (or dress for

> that matter) is lazy social shorthand at best, and

> more likely just plain prejudice (Occupationalism?

> Dressism?)

>

> So piss off, you crusty. I?m tired of seeing you

> in that stinky rainbow-striped sweater every time

> you manage to claw a few inches in the press.

> Those ?suits? are probably the very same

> demographic that are tuned in to your

> middle-of-the-road choonz, man.

>

> And while I?m at it, what a banal, idiotic choice

> of pseudonym. Let?s hope your kids don?t inherit

> your narrow-mindedness and lack of imagination.

>

> Rant over.



" so piss off you crusty " isnt lazy social shorhand ? , leave the guy alone .

Link to comment
Share on other sites
flapjackdavey

flapjackdavey

Posted
Posted

Mark Wrote:

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

> Let me guess kanga, you wear a suit? In fact, are

> you a suit? And he said he liked it because "There

> are not too many suits", not because "There are

> not any suits" there's subtle difference.

>

> And having a go at someone (who you have to admit

> is pretty good and successful even without a suit)

> because of their name is rather stupid. I'm going

> out on a limb here, are you an estate agent?



excellent :)-D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Santerme

Santerme

Posted
Posted

flapjackdavey Wrote:

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

> kanga Wrote:

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

> -----

> > So Rob da Bank says in one of this evening?s

> > freesheets that he likes living in East Dulwich

> as

> > there are ?not too many suits?.

> >

> > Judging someone by their occupation (or dress

> for

> > that matter) is lazy social shorthand at best,

> and

> > more likely just plain prejudice

> (Occupationalism?

> > Dressism?)

> >

> > So piss off, you crusty. I?m tired of seeing

> you

> > in that stinky rainbow-striped sweater every

> time

> > you manage to claw a few inches in the press.

> > Those ?suits? are probably the very same

> > demographic that are tuned in to your

> > middle-of-the-road choonz, man.

> >

> > And while I?m at it, what a banal, idiotic

> choice

> > of pseudonym. Let?s hope your kids don?t

> inherit

> > your narrow-mindedness and lack of imagination.

> >

> > Rant over.

>

>

> " so piss off you crusty " isnt lazy social

> shorhand ? .... who the hell are you anyway ? ,

> leave the guy alone .



Four edits?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
flapjackdavey

flapjackdavey

Posted
Posted

Santerme Wrote:

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

> flapjackdavey Wrote:

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

> -----

> > kanga Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > > So Rob da Bank says in one of this evening?s

> > > freesheets that he likes living in East

> Dulwich

> > as

> > > there are ?not too many suits?.

> > >

> > > Judging someone by their occupation (or dress

> > for

> > > that matter) is lazy social shorthand at

> best,

> > and

> > > more likely just plain prejudice

> > (Occupationalism?

> > > Dressism?)

> > >

> > > So piss off, you crusty. I?m tired of seeing

> > you

> > > in that stinky rainbow-striped sweater every

> > time

> > > you manage to claw a few inches in the press.

> > > Those ?suits? are probably the very same

> > > demographic that are tuned in to your

> > > middle-of-the-road choonz, man.

> > >

> > > And while I?m at it, what a banal, idiotic

> > choice

> > > of pseudonym. Let?s hope your kids don?t

> > inherit

> > > your narrow-mindedness and lack of

> imagination.

> > >

> > > Rant over.

> >

> >

> > " so piss off you crusty " isnt lazy social

> > shorhand ? .... who the hell are you anyway ? ,

> > leave the guy alone .

>

>

> Four edits?



yep

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Keef

Keef

Posted
Posted
Let me guess kanga, you wear a suit? In fact, are you a suit? And he said he liked it because "There are not too many suits", not because "There are not any suits" there's subtle difference.


And having a go at someone (who you have to admit is pretty good and successful even without a suit) because of their name is rather stupid. I'm going out on a limb here, are you an estate agent?



Bit harsh for you Mark, is Rob your mate or something?


Personally, I'm with Kanga, I think he looks and sounds like the son of

, the mockney tw@t!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
*Bob*

*Bob*

Posted
Posted

If I walk into a pub populated by people in suits, I try to get out as quickly as possibly.


Nothing personal about the people in the suits individually, but suits en masse = a load of people tenuously connected by a workplace they despise, feeling obliged to go out for a drink with colleagues in order to drone on about what happened in the office that week and perhaps try to get off with someone which undoubtedly they will come to regret come Monday morning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fear 'n boozin

Fear 'n boozin

Posted
Posted

I'd like to think that I'd walk out of a pub full of suited types too, but then I'm thinking that'd be a pub in the city, and I wouldn't bother going there anyway. I'd also like to think I'd walk out of a pub full of people with names like Rob the Bank, let's call it the Bishop.


Lol keif.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brendan

Brendan

Posted
Posted

kanga Wrote:

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

> ... plain prejudice (Occupationalism?

> Dressism?)

>

> So piss off, you crusty...


HUMAN BEING IN INABILITY TO RECOGNISE THE BLATANT CONTRADICTORY NATURE OF THEIR OWN ARGUMENT - SHOCKER!



Edit: For our good and the good of all his church.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
  • Advertise Here

  • Latest Discussions

    • theweekend
      Food poisoning at Dugard & Daughters - twice!

      By theweekend · Posted

      I don't know how spoillable food can be used as evidence in whatever imaginary CSI scenario you are imagining.  And yes, three times. One purchase was me, others were my partner. We don't check in with each other before buying meat. Twice we wrote it off as incidental. But now at three times it seems like a trend.   So the shop will be hearing from me. Though they won't ever see me again that's for sure.  I'd be happy to field any other questions you may have Sue. Your opinion really matters to me. 
    • Sue
      Food poisoning at Dugard & Daughters - twice!

      By Sue · Posted

      If you thought they were off, would it not have been a good idea to have kept them rather than throwing them away, as evidence for Environmental Health or whoever? Or indeed the shop? And do you mean this is the third time you have bought chicken from the same shop which has been off? Have you told the shop? Why did you buy it again if you have twice previously had chicken from there which was off? Have I misunderstood?
    • theweekend
      Food poisoning at Dugard & Daughters - twice!

      By theweekend · Posted

      I found this post after we just had to throw away £14 of chicken thighs from Dugard in HH, and probably for the 3rd time. They were roasted thoroughly within an hour of purchase. But they came out of the oven smelling very woofy.  We couldn't take a single bite, they were clearly off. Pizza for dinner it is then. Very disappointing. 
    • McMurphy
      Charter East Dulwich school

      By McMurphy · Posted

      interesting read.  We're thinking about the same things for our kids in primary school as well. One thing I don't understand about Charter ED is whether they stream / set kids based on ability.  I got the impression from an open evening that it is done a little as possible. All i could find on-line was this undated letter - https://www.chartereastdulwich.org.uk/_site/data/files/users/18/documents/9473A8A3547CCCD39DBC4A55CA1678DC.pdf?pid=167 For the most part, we believe in mixed ability teaching and do not stream in Year 7 or Year 8. The only exceptions to this are that we have a small nurture class for Maths. This is a provision for students who scored lower than 85 in their SATS exams and is designed to support them to acquire the skills to access the learning in mainstream class. We do not have nurture classes for any other subjects. We take a more streamed - though not a setted - approach in Maths and Science from Year 9 onwards. though unsure if this is still accurate reflection of policy, and unsure of difference between streaming and setting.

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...