Sue

DulwichBorn&Bred Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > But it's super busy all the times as evident by > the queues. > Can we not do a petition or something ? If the building is no longer fit for purpose, it's not really relevant whether it's super busy at the collection point or not. From the above it looks as if Royal Mail did try to find suitable premises in East Dulwich but weren't able to. The move will certainly inconvenience a lot of people, but it's hard to see what else they could do.

I am going to get legal advice.

Lewis Schaffer has again posted my full name on Twitter. Because he is banned from here he is now responding to my posts on here on Twitter, and again linking them to The Goose Is Out. Please can anybody help. Do you people defending him on here think that this continuing harassment is OK? Because I don't. I presume he is trying to bully me into stopping posting on here.

Maybe time to get a new battery? I'm no expert but I think they run down when they're old? ETA: I have homestart through Britannia Rescue and its been well worth the money eg when all my indicators failed and they came and replaced the fuse. ETA: They also have high speed charging equipment which will charge the battery in situ while you wait.

edhistory Wrote: ---------------------------------------------- > > > New Yorker, Nunheader and Star of Resonance FM?s > Nunhead American Radio Lewis Schaffer brings his > brilliant 5 star Edinburgh comedy show to The Ivy > House for a benefit gig for Save Southwark Woods, > with a donation to London's independent arts radio > station Resonance FM > I hadn't noticed until it was pointed out to me that this benefit "for the woods" is also for a radio station. That seems strange to say the least.

What I find weird is the way they turn people who disagree with their views and/or point out inaccuracies in their statements into "haters". Quite interesting from a psychological viewpoint I suppose.

ruffers Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Seems to me this whole thread has been tainted by > Lewis's aggression. > > There is a conversation to be had for sure, shall > we start again? Good idea. New thread? Different title? Discussion sticking to actual verifiable facts plus opinion clearly stated as opinion? Probably started by somebody opposed to the council's plans but able to unemotionally state why? ETA: Maybe even seeking common ground? Revolutionary idea, I know .....

steveo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Thanks landsberger, that's a half hour playing > with flightradar I'll never get back I bet you enjoyed it though :))

Thanks for bringing us this info, Foxy. That's bad news. First the bank, now this. Seems I shall be making rather more frequent trips to Peckham in the future. Looking on the bright side - Khans, Persepolis, Lidl, Primark and Iceland :))

HopOne Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yes and let's not forget that ad hominem > arguments, of which there have been countless on > this thread, are unpleasant in any discourse. To > continue doing this, when an individual is banned > so cannot defend themselves, is just not cricket > is it? No, Lewis should not have outed anyone on > Twitter. But Sue, you could also engage with the > subject or leave it alone. To do neither is > trolling IMO. > The person is not here to defend himself because he has been banned. And frankly it is hard to see what defence he could have. I consider my posts are relevant, because the person in question is conducting/leading a campaign which is the subject of this thread. The manner in which that campaign is being conducted is clear to see by anyone reading the thread, and in particular the contents and tone of its leader's posts - some of which admin has had to remove altogether. How exactly am I not "engaging with the subject"? I have stated my views clearly on the many threads started on the subject on this forum. Why should I "leave it alone"? Who are you to tell me what I should and shouldn't post? How am I trolling? How would you feel if somebody started to harass you online?

LauraW Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Rather a lot of people on EDF seem to make a hobby > of getting into conflicts. I'm not suggesting > Lewis sought them out here. He was posting on this > forum for a campaign he is involved in. He was indeed. And then he was banned from the forum. Why do you think that was?

LauraW Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It's a campaign and they've been working hard to > make it successful. Do you have a problem with > campaigns or are you just particularly keen for > this one to not succeed? What's it to you, Sue? I have a problem with campaigns which are economical with the truth and which are run using the kind of methods demonstrated on this thread.

LauraW Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Woah, where has this accusation of misogyny come > from? Lewis gets into conflicts with people and > they get into conflicts with him but a Twitter > spat with Sue doesn't make him a misogynist. If > it's relevant, I'm a woman and have known him for > 4 years. > > I'm disappointed now that I know who Sue is that > someone in the folk scene would be in favour of > turning a green space as wonderful as COC into > another waterlogged sterile place to plant graves. > The fact that she's reacted so badly to having her > identity exposed does suggest that she was using > online anonymity as a shield while behaving > trollishly on EDF. 1. It is not "a twitter spat with Sue". It is Lewis Schaffer out of the blue posting my full name on twitter, continuing to do so when asked to stop, and associating the cemetery issue with a twitter page devoted to folk music (and community music) events which my partner and I run locally despite the fact that this issue has nothing to do with those events, and my opinions are mine and mine alone. And it is Lewis Schaffer saying that he will continue to post my full name because I refer to him by his full name on here - carefully omitting to mention that he has posted his full name at the end of his own posts on here, so clearly he is quite happy for people on here to know it! 2. I love trees, and I have an area of woodland dedicated to me via the Woodland Trust. My being "in the folk scene" does not mean that I throw reason to the winds and choose to ignore all the facts about the particular issue being discussed on this thread because I love trees. 3. As civilservant says above, many people on here know who I am in real life. And I post about our folk music events on here, so it is hardly a secret to those who don't know me in real life. That does not mean I want my full name including my surname plastered all over Twitter, and Lewis Schaffer has no right whatsoever to do that. 4. How, exactly, have I "behaved trollishly on the EDF"?

Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sue Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Lewis Schaffer has posted again on Twitter, > again > > using my surname and again linking me with The > > Goose Is Out! > > > > Can anybody tell me if there is something I can > do > > about this? > > > > ETA: This is harassment. > > Sue, > > I assume this would fall under 'release of private > information' and you an report him directly to > Twitter using this page: > https://support.twitter.com/forms/private_informat > ion > > Alternatively, you can report a single tweet for > abuse with a link in the tweet itself: > https://support.twitter.com/articles/20170408# Thank you Loz. I've reported him to Twitter. He has done this using his Lewis Schaffer twitter account, and has now tweeted my full name three times despite being asked to stop. Considering he put his full name under every post of his on here, I do not think it is unreasonable for others to use it on here. And to post my surname on Twitter is just not on. Sample posts: @TheGooseIsOut Sue (my surname). Come meet with us at cemetery or meet at @Save_Ivy_House Is Sue (my surname) the Sue on the East Dulwich Forum? Do you support cutting down the Woods and digging up graves? Sue (my surname) at the @TheGooseIsOut: Do you support cutting down trees and digging up graves in Nunhead and East Dulwich?

It was not me who introduced the subject of picnics, and as the thread I linked to shows, SSW did indeed plan a picnic in the cemetery and invited people to it. I have asked Lewis Schaffer to stop and he has again tweeted and used my surname and used The Goose Is Out's tag. I am bloody furious. This has got nothing to do with the Goose. The man is a menace. Some of you posting on this thread know him. Please get him to stop. This is far from a joke. The Goose twitter thread is to promote our gigs, not to publicise a total idiot. He now says it's because I've mentioned him by name on here, but every post of his has his name on it!!

Lewis Schaffer has posted again on Twitter, again using my surname and again linking me with The Goose Is Out! Can anybody tell me if there is something I can do about this? ETA: This is harassment.

Thank you bawdy-nan.

Thanks from me too, Foxy x

HopOne Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sue, you are not dreaming just obfuscating. Excuse me? Firstly, is it really necessary to use words like obfuscating? Are you trying to show all us inferior beings how many long and rarely used words you know? Secondly, how am I obfuscating, exactly? ETA: Here is the thread in question - the very first post invites people to a picnic, after which the discussion includes viewpoints on the appropriateness or otherwise of using a cemetery for picnics if one is not actually visiting a grave. http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,1533238 ETA: Lewis Schaffer is now contacting me via Twitter via The Goose Is Out twitter account, and has included my surname in his tweet. I think this is a bloody cheek, not to say an invasion of my privacy. Can none of you other SSW people keep him under control?

I too would like to know the source of this rumour/information. I sincerely hope it isn't true. I have a small letterbox and consequently have to go to Silvester Road quite often to collect things. I don't particularly want to have to increase the size of the letterbox :(

HopOne Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Am not aware of any picnic area > plans Wasn't a picnic one of the first things SSW came on this forum to publicise? Or am I dreaming? It was certainly some kind of family playday in one of the cemeteries ......

Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Once again I implore people who do care about the > local environment not to tilt at windmills but to > focus on ensuring that the council undertakes its > plans sensitively, plants the right sorts of trees > as replacements and quickly, and brings the > neglected areas of the cemeteries back into use > without unnecessary delay. That is the best way of > ensuring that the areas are still pleasant to be > in and use for those not wanting them for their > primary purpose. > Well said! ETA: But I assume the SSW "benefit" gig will still go ahead on Sunday as planned so that they can pay for things like their glossy postcards which they were asking people to send off to the diocese last November objecting to the council's plans for the cemetery area adjacent to One Tree Hill. Each postcard asked the diocese to confirm receipt of the objection - that must have delighted the poor person who had to do that. And presumably pay for stamps to do so, as the cards didn't have a space to give an email address. One would hope that SSW would now give their supporters full and accurate information, and change their approach to that suggested by Penguin68. Why do I so cynically doubt it? It would be great to be proved wrong.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It's in Peckham. Yes, but it's about how Peckham is defined, isn't it? There have been similar discussions on here in the past about what exactly is East Dulwich, if memory serves?

Morris dancing is blooming hard work! I did it for a while! The stick bashing was the best bit :)) Not so keen on the handkies :)) I'm having a dry-ish February. Can't say I've noticed any great difference in energy levels, but I do seem to be sleeping better ......

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rendelharris - ignore edhistory... he's always > doing this. I think edhistory's question was fair enough. I didn't know what "technically in Peckham" meant either!