Marmora Man

Two answers: Price - EDD - ?1.75. Gregg's - ?1.00 or ?1.25 Snorky - agree this is a subjective judgement, but there can be good, better and best when comparing two similar items. There is a vast difference between "Wallaby White" & "Kanga Rouge" wines and the finest Claret or Chablis, there is a difference between a Rolls Royce and a Robin Reliant - both do the same job, but the RR is a better car - will last longer, protect you better in a crash, keep its value longer, give you a smoother ride. As you'll be aware Louisa prompted this thread by asserting that my taste for EDD sausage rolls was somehow based upon my snobbish belief in paying more in a smart shop. I'm trying to bring some objectivity to the discussion. I'd also agree that sausage are probably not high on the Chief Medical Officer's recommendations - but nor is my love of malt whisky, red wine, belly of pork, curry, Guinness and many other fine things of life.

in the "Love London" thread it has been claimed that eating EDD sausage rolls is pure snobbery by Claphamite incomers who probably read the Guardian. It was also claimed that Greggs sausage rolls are as good or better. This was discussed, briefly, in a thread about 12 months ago. Are they the best? I would argue the following: EDD sausage rolls are very good and, in my opinion, far better than Greggs sausage rolls - my evidence is my taste buds - subjective I know, but thoroughly tested over the years. I would cite in support of my argument the fact that the EDD sausage rolls are: a. Made on the premises (by the owner) b. Made from very meaty sausage meat - on eating it is possible to feel the texture of the sausage meat. c. The pastry is buttery - taste tells d. Have herbs in - taste tells Greggs by contrast: a. Are not made on the premises b. Are made from sausage meat with no texture, more of a meat flavoured paste - probably, tho' unless Greggs come clean I cannot prove this, with a significant mechanically recovered meat content. c. Have no herbs in - taste tells d. Pastry has little or no butter - taste tells. I suggested an objective blind tasting in the "Love London" thread - not sure how we could organise this but willing to bring along the goods for the test. The tester must be an objective person - perhaps a local chef would oblige - bon3yard over to you? Disclaimer: I am not, and have never been, a member of the East Dulwich Deli.

I like my own home with a view from my "study" aka as the back bedroom.

daizie Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > the snobbery in east dulwich brings me close to > tears, Louisa have you ever sat in the bishop > during the day, weekdays and weekends?, it is a > truly eye opening experience, afraid it brings out > the worst in me, may go back and let off a stink > bomb What's the problem at The Bishop? There are better pubs and worse - but it's better, to my mind, than OK. I've sat there of a lunchtime reading a newspaper, eating macaroni cheese with bacon (excellent) and drinking Guiness. Alongside me have been mothers & children, other middle (?) aged men, HGV drivers, once a drug dealer and his minder, a couple of young women discussing sharing a flat. A cross section of human life - I prefer it at lunchtime when it's not so crowded and sometimes treat teenage son to their Eggs Benedict of a Sunday. Agree with Beef - this was a thread about praising local businesses. Let's get back to that.

And my previous addresses were N London, Essex, The Atlantic / Artic and Mediterranean oceans & seas, Devon, Cornwall, the Midlands and S London. Not necessarily working class all - but certainly working at all of them. I learnt to distinguish good food in my mother's kitchen and later my own as a bachelor - certainly not by reading the Guardian or eating at Michelin starred restaurants.

Louisa - I'm impressed that you can make the question of taste and quality a "class issue". It must take an extreme and illogical mindset to consider that praising the objective (or even the subjective) quality of a product (any product) is a class issue. Didn't Two Jags / Two Pies Prescott say "we're all middle class now"??

Sean McG - something we can agree on! We were posting at the same time.

Come on - I've been eating and enjoying good food for over 50 years. I'm price conscious and quality conscious but not misguided unless my taste buds are totally shot. I am prepared to bet that an objective blind tasting of almost all (I'd probably say all - but leave an opening for others to disagree) EDD produce - sausage rolls, chocolate brownies, sponge cakes, walnut loaves and their ham against Greggs produce would give EDD a win every time. I wouldn't assert that there's a straight linear relationship between the quality and price at each establishment but ?1.75 for a meaty, herby flaky pastry wrapped sausage roll - that weighs I'd estimate a good 6 ozs and is made on the premises at EDD is good value. ?1.00 for a industrially produced flaccid, pink and flavourless sausage roll with stodgy pastry and warmed over in the microwave at Greggs is only VFM if you're: a. Stoney broke and unable to spend an extra 50p or so b. In dire need of something to ease the pangs of hunger. c. There's no alternative supply of edible food. I have eaten Greggs SRs - in Brum when conditions b. & c. applied - but not on LL with EDD 50 yards away.

Louisa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ???? that is your opinion, but I personally stick > with my first observation. And yes I agree, it is > overpriced. Bring back Kennedys. > > Louisa. ???? didn't say it was overpriced but that it was expensive - different implications. I stand by my statement re sausage rolls (eating one at present) and the ham. All deli's tend to be at the higher end of the price range and I don't find EDD off the scale for the quality they provide.

The online option is just exploring another community - just like a party, a sports club, book club, pub, lonely hearts column or the top deck of a bus. I met my wife through friends of friends - but met previous girlfriends in all sorts of places - including a skiing holiday, a car crash (minor - no-one hurt) and a Danish Museum. Never online as I married before Tim Berners Lee invented the WWW. The EDF is a community that meets in virtual space and ED pubs. It's been around for three years (?). Maybe there are some romances out there between EDF'ers??

Louisa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > East Dulwich Deli is awful, I wont be voting for > it! > > Louisa. I will tho'. Their sausage rolls are the best - as is their ham on the bone.

I was in the Montpelier - Peckham today. Good pub with large screen rugby showing. Worth a note for the future perhaps.

dazeykat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Do any of you complainers give to any good cause, > whether time or money? Yes & Yes.

PeckhamRose Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Old Vic Dancing at Lughnasa > GREAT reviews. > THE most BORING piece of theatre I have seen in > ages. A group of women talk about stuff in their > small Irish community in 1936 and how life is > changing. > > There: just saved you a ton of money. B*****. Mrs MM and I are going tonight on the basis of the great reviews and having missed it first time around.

DC - I don't think the three party arrangement would continue in a full PR system. Labour, Cons and Lib Dems (esp LIb Dems) would fragment into smaller groupings with different agendas - resulting in many more small parties exceeding the 5% threshold.

Having driven past the works today I see that, apart from modifying the annoying "hump" at the entrance to Friern Road they have simply upgraded the previous very short and useless cycle paths that allowed cyclists to use the pavement to go around the pedestrian crossing lights. The cycle paths remain useless but now the ramps on / off the road are smooth and legant. What a waste of money (and I'm a cyclist).

Proportional Representation - I have long resisted this innovation. I can see the attraction - given that we have now had 30 years with just two governments, but still feel it has four major flaws: 1. It tends to create weak coalition governments - eg Italy / Israel etc. Constant shifting of allegiances for short term political advantage works to the disadvantage of the electorate and tends to create far more elections and short term governments. Would a coalition government have tackled excessive union power in the 80's or managed to pass the anti hunting legislation in the 90's? (I'm not arguing for either particular piece of legislation, merely that they required a strong government to achieve) 2. There are two perverse effects - each the opposite of the other. One is a tendency to the mean or centre - the need for the relatively strong parties to maximise their support by not being too extreme. Yet, at the same time any particular coalition may need to shore up its alliance by bringing onboard a more extreme party and tailor it's approach to keep that faction happy. 3. Since there usually needs to be a period of negotiation before the government is declared the electorate cannot vote for a clear manifesto - whatever each party may have said they will trim their sails to enter power in a coalition. 4. It breaks the important link between MP and a constituency. An MP may be "allocated" to a constituency from a party list but the essential geographical link with a community and its party association is lost. This gives the party leadership great powers to place political mavericks sufficiently far down the selection list that they have no chance of being allocated.

I'm with you - forced jollity and public giving. Baah humbug. Real charity is private and fun is what you have with friends, not via a TV.

Ted Max Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don't know anyone who posts here, as far as I'm > aware, and am in no clique as far as I'm aware, > but I do get annoyed by Tony's ability to make so > many threads about himself. Agree - I'm annoyed too. Marmora Man, I'm reasonably close to some of the output of the CSJ - some decent proposals but an awful lot of failed old Tory thinking in there as well. But it's travelling in the right (no pun intended) direction I appreciate the tactical value to the C&P Tories of having one of the apparent good guys (Stranack)on their side - but the fact that he's so different from the usual Party fodder highlights a problem, doesn't it, with the Party at large? I suppose I should properly have described him as challenging the typical stereotype of a conservative candidate. On a personal note, having met Andy I believe he has the potential to defeat Harriet Harman through a combination of personality, knowledge and experience of inner city living and its problems, plus a genuine desire to make a difference and improve the lot of his constituents. Which opens up another discussion - should we vote for local candidates, or on a party basis? Difficult. The "purist" answer is vote for local candidate but pragmatically there is a need to take the wider view. In practical terms only voters in swing / marginal seat have any impact on the election result and they are the ones that must consider most carefully.

Watched the first episode as pre reviews were good - but agree, a basically sound story ruined by poor direction and a very muddled narrative. Have recorded second episode and, if it's clearer as you say, will give it a go.

Peckhamgatecrasher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I am a natural Tory but that's a wasted vote round > here, so I usually go Lib Dem or Green depending > how I feel on the day. PGC - have a look at Andy Stranack he's the Conservative PPC for Camberwell and Peckham and is working hard to build a coalition to defeat Harriet Harman. He has a "non standard" background for a Tory and has already built links with the local community and ethnic minorities. Given the general loathing of HH - a viable alternative could oust her.

In herd immunity terms - treat the infected as best as possible - expect a partial recovery only. Let the infection fade away as the generations mature. Give the new, uninfected, generations a suitable vaccination, aim for minimum take up of 90% but aim for 100%. In terms of today's "sick society" (a lousy and cliched term BTW) the treatment and vaccinations are hard to develop and harder still to implement. Suggest that the discarded mantra of "Education, Education, Education" is the best place to start but really mean it and fund it this time - and don't constrain it with meaningless ideology or bureaucracy.

I'm tempted to ask for this thread to be locked off - it has drifted a long way from the original question of "would you / wouldn't you vote Tory". However, the last three posts from Hugenot, Xena and Bob seem more rational and sane.

Excuse me, while I kiss this guy

I haven't noticed too much support for Libertarianism from either business or the right wing. It could be argued that absolute libertarianism equates to anarchy - but the reality of modern libertarianism is that it seeks to reduce the power of the state and enhance the power of the individual. Anyway - at present the balance seems to be either vote Tory or abstain from voting Labour. Looks bad for Labour.