Sue

DulwichFox Wrote: > As the law (an ass) stands.. If I had picked up > some of the rubbish and 'Missed' a piece, I would > of been responsible > if someone slipped on a piece I had missed.... What law is that, Foxy??

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Many years ago my mum sliped on a magazine in her > home and broke her hip landing on carpet. > She had 3 operations over the years.. > > At one time she slipped on a small piece of > plastic in a store resulting in her new hip coming > loose. > resulting in the 3rd operation. > > SO.. do not underestimate the dangers.. If > someone were to slip and fall backwards hitting > their head > on the hard floor surface .. it COULD be lethal. > > DulwichFox . (Previous Health and Safety Officer) > for large corporation.. B.T. If you did a risk assessment of every potential hazard in a public place, the whole country would close down and nobody would ever go anywhere. Was there any reason why you didn't pick the cardboard up yourself, since you thought it was such a hazard and the staff weren't doing so?

I think you'd have to be walking around in a total daze and not looking where you were going to trip over those, tbh. If it bothered you that much, why not pick it up and take it to the checkout area? It's only cardboard, it's hardly huge areas of slippery liquid spillage! I use the Co-Op quite a lot and I've never noticed either rubbish on the floor or rotten food. I also use two different branches in Oxford quite a lot and I've never noticed rubbish or rotten food in those either.

Nigello Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Given that people are in need - as this man's > actions show - perhaps EDF posters should have a > good clear out and pass on their pre-loved clothes > to the local charity shops or organisations. Unfortunately, some of the local charity shops (eg the Mind shop) charge what I would consider quite a lot for pre-loved clothes. May not sound a lot if you have a job, but it is if you don't. Whereas getting them free from a bin costs nowt and saves them from landfill. Not that I am condoning going onto somebody's property to rummage through their bin.

aerie Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Mary's Living and Giving, on the corner next to > Health Matters - it was an expensive charity shop. > Now folded after a visit from the Mary > apparently. So why does it have a notice in the window saying it is reopening after refurbishment? It is definitely being done up.

Their free range eggs, cheddar and frozen veg were good value. I miss Iceland :(

There is a notice in their window saying they will reopen between (I think) 22 and 25 July - ie soon.

worldwiser Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm sure there's a sensible health & safety reason > for not having an entrance right off a busy > roundabout but they could definitely add one near > the EDR corner (the service road side rather than > the busy side) > > The gate near the church hasn't worked for months > so may as well not exist but they've just spent an > eye watering amount redoing Camberwell Green - > they can obviously afford to replace with self > closers and add one path. The pedestrian gate opposite the church is in full use. I've used it several times recently. Are you confusing it with the entrance for cars etc further down, which is only open when there are events on the Green and people with stalls etc need to drive in? And didn't Camberwell Green get lottery funding, or have I mixed that up with something else?

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I know some people swear by Rescue Remedy. I > suggest you try it. It has a calming effect. > > http://www.bachflower.com/rescue-remedy-informatio > n/ > > I have found Rescue Remedy works to calm me down if I am anxious or stressed. I don't believe it is a placebo effect as I had no idea what it was when somebody first gave it to me. You can get it from Health Matters on Lordship Lane. It's quite cheap, so if you try it and find it doesn't work for you you haven't wasted a lot of money. These days there is a spray which is possibly easier to use than the drops. There's a lot of good advice above. I personally have not found medication for stress/anxiety/depression useful (it made me feel really strange) but everybody is different. It sounds like you've been through a really hard time, and I hope things improve for you.

Sally Eva Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi Sue, are you in touch with Cycle Confident? The > council funds them and they are very good. > > Yes, thanks Sally Eva, that's who I'm doing my lessons with. ETA: And thanks for the info about cycle rides!

sheilarose Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What are you suggesting? That nothing should be > published for fear of someone "getting ideas". > Bizarre. Let's get rid of the news then, shall we? > And this forum. Especially this forum. My original point was, if memory serves, that there could be more than one killer. And I'm not sure quite how you jump from one particular issue of potential killers getting ideas from publicity about methods of killing to "getting rid of the news" :))

sheilarose Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sue Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > > > And re the cat killer/s, if information re the > > mode of killing has been posted online, then > > clearly there could be copycat killers. > > > > > Obviously, not ALL the information has been > released. Police often hold back one or two bits > of detail, just so they can detect copycats. Do > you not watch any cop shows on TV? No I don't watch any cop shows on TV. And the fact remains that publicising any info at all puts the idea into the heads of potential copycat killers. Whether they are copying the exact M.O. is irrelevant. The end result is the same, ie dead and injured cats. And the police just have a harder task because there are more incidents, regardless of whether they can identify the work of different killers or not.

I had my first lesson in Peckham Rye Park, but doing U turns on the relatively narrow paths was a bit hairy. That's why I'm moving to Dulwich Park to build up my confidence.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > i dont think extra entrances/exits necessarily > require extra paths. I would have thought most > dogs could jump the low fence around GG anyway, if > they were so inclined. If you have gates without paths, you will have unsightly bare patches across the green where the grass has been worn away.

spider69 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > If you cannot manage this park road with > confidence you should not be on the road. How very helpful and encouraging. Better suggest to Southwark Council they take their cycling lessons elsewhere then. Any suggestions as to where beginner cyclists should gain confidence if not in a place without cars? ETA: And obviously I am not cycling on roads with cars yet, otherwise I'd hardly need to practice in a park.

I can see why more gates could be useful, but I think it would be a pity to break up the expanse of green grass with more paths. The gate opposite the church isn't far from the fish shop, is it?

I'm quite concerned about this. I haven't cycled for years, am far from confident and am taking advantage of Southwark Council's free lessons- which for beginners take place in parks. My second lesson will be in Dulwich Park, and my instructor has advised me to practice there in the meantime. If people are walking dogs with a leash stretched across the road, then that fills me with horror frankly.

Sorry to hear about your bike. You could ask the council to put a bike hangar in your street? Though they took about two years to get round to installing the one in mine.......

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- I hate it when it's middle aged men in crap > hats playing solos over hackneyed 12 bar boogie... What on earth have you been listening to?!

DuncanW Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The reason the PLP wants rid of him is pretty > straight-forward. Their view is he appeals to > activists and those on the left of the party, but > not to middle-ground floating voter whose support > is essential to Labour ever winning another > election. I know several people who haven't voted or who have voted Green of late who have come back to Labour because of Corbyn. I also know many people who will leave Labour if Corbyn does not stay as leader. Including myself. We are only "on the left" of the party because it has moved so far right. And it was not Labour under Corbyn who totally lost touch with its former supporters in, for example, the north. It was the Tory Lite Labour MPs who were placed in constituencies where they apparently had nothing whatever in common with their constituents. Anyway, I'm going up to my allotment now :))

red devil Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Seems to me the PLP is going about this the wrong > way. Instead of trying to oust Corbyn they should > just ban Folk music... :))

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > And why are Momentum assuming that all these new > members are Corbyn supporters. I know quite a few > that signed up straight after the referendum so > that they could vote against him if a challenge > came. I know many people who signed up so that they could vote for Corbyn. But then I live in a bubble of people with similar political views to myself who want this country to be in the hands of people with honesty and integrity who care about looking after everybody, rather than in the hands of a load of self-serving, lying, back-stabbing (insert rude word of choice here) s.

And now the NEC have (has?) stopped all local party meetings. They are really, really desperate, aren't they? Trying to shut down discussion amongst the grassroots members, and desperate to stop the Tory Lite MPs being deselected.

More to the point, Labour's website stated (and possibly still does) quite clearly that if you joined up you would be able to vote in any leadership election. So surely they are in breach of contract? It didn't say anything about "Oh, and you'll have to pay extra".