Sue

Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Surely they should cut down all but one of the > trees on One Tree Hill? > > Anyway, is the forum software able stop edborders > from opening new threads, so he is forced to add > to one big thread on the subject, rather than > continually opening new threads on the same > subject? Indeed. I imagine he is hoping people will either not have read the other threads or will have forgotten them. Can't see how software would be able to prevent this unless threads had exactly the same subject heading, unfortunately. .

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > No please... no links... just... no. But the thing is, people can't make these attacks on me and then not back them up with evidence. I'm getting very sick of it. I now have three people doing it - DJKQ, Scotch Bonnet and Grok. Oh, and Cella, who has also had a personal go at me on several occasions. How would you feel? I feel weary.

Links please so that we can all see the context and judge for ourselves. Foxy is a friend and neighbour of mine. I was very positive about The Lordship before it opened. The owners of the OLD Cherry Tree were notorious. Perhaps you could give examples of "vindictive" posts I made, as I am not aware of any that weren't completely factual. The McCann disappearance has nothing to do with this. So - please post up links to the relevant threads so we can all judge for ourselves. And maybe you too could come out from your cowardly attacks on here and say these things to my face. You wont though, will you? ETA. And I have no idea what you are referring to re our music venues. Perhaps you could post up links to these "trivial" things as well. I am genuinely sorry for you. Judging by this and your other posts on here, you sound like a very unhappy person. I hope I'm wrong as I wouldn't wish unhappiness on anyone.

scotchbonnet1951 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Oh and here we go AGAIN! SUE stirring it up, i > would say you are a bully on this forum. The last > time i saw you i was walking my dog, it was 2012 > late afternoon on a Sunday and you were so drunk > you were slumped over the bins outside that cafe > on Pellatt Road, i think it used to be Jacks. We > all had a good laugh about it! Thanks for the > entertainment You haven't managed to come up with any examples of my "constantly" and "always" "slating local businesses", so perhaps you will have better luck with some examples of my being "a bully on this forum" and "stirring it up". Let's have them. Again, I'm not holding my breath. As regards the rest of your latest charming post, see my last two posts above. "I think it used to be Jacks" :)) :)) :)) Oh, and you (and DJ) may find the following enlightening: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection "Psychological projection, also known as blame shifting, is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unpleasant impulses by denying their existence while attributing them to others. For example, a person who is rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude.

Help-Ma-Boab Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Jacks was actually open. LOL.Yes because we had booked the whole room for the birthday do, and ordered all the food in advance, so luckily it was actually open :)) ETA I wouldn't have drunk so much if we hadn't had to wait such an extremely long time for the main course (which when it eventually turned up was stone cold). And we were the only people in there :(

Let people judge for themselves: http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?20,737891,page=11

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Don't think so in this case, but definitely has a > gripe against Sue and has been pretty personal in > at least 3 of her 19 posts on this forum under > that name. After the reference to Jacks, I think I know who it is. And yes, I'm sure I probably was very drunk outside Jacks - on one occasion. It was my twin brothers' fiftieth birthday meal there and I had drunk a lot of celebratory wine. How disgraceful. I should have stuck to orange juice, especially considering I live just round the corner. And funnily enough I had - after provocation - described that less-than-impressive meal at Jacks on the Bubble and Squeak thread. But hey, I'm not jumping to conclusions. Scotch Bonnet is probably some random punter who just happened past as our family celebrations were coming to an end, knows who I am on the forum, remembers the year and day of the week it happened and that it was in the late afternoon, remembers the Franklins thread from years ago and thought they'd slag me off publicly three times in quick succession. That must be it. ETA: So not DJ. Someone else similarly charming with a similar modus operandi. And if not who I think if is, then probably somebody who is connected to her in some way. But hey - I don't know. But I bloody hate people who hide behind their forum name/s and make personal remarks. Come to one of our gigs and say these things to my face. I look forward to it. Http://www.thegooseisout.com

scotchbonnet1951 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I thought you slated Franklins? In fact correct me > if i am wrong but aren't you barred from > Franklins! I don't think anybody will forget you > slating them for their bubble and squeak and > sending the chef a recipe. > > > Sue Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Well done to The Ivy House - runner up for > bar/pub > > of the year in SE15 (it won last year). > > > > > http://www.timeout.com/london/lovelondonawards#/re > > > sults/peckham/bars-&-pubs > > > > Haven't looked at it all, but some of the East > > Dulwich results are here - well done Franklins! > > > > > http://www.timeout.com/london/lovelondonawards#/re > > > sults/dulwich-and-east-dulwich/restaurants > > > > Delighted to see Blue Brick Cafe also a runner > up! I don't know why you are bringing this up now. No, I'm not barred from Franklins and never have been. I have never slated their food in general, in fact I have praised it on many occasions as you could check if you could be bothered to look through my posts (just click on my name and they will all come up). I was unhappy with one dish, the bubble and squeak, because after it had been absolutely fine every time I had it, on two occasions it came out as a pile of mash and cabbage which was completely soft and had not been crisped on the outside as bubble and squeak should be. I had fed this back in person via the waitress, and when it happened again yes I did write to the chef and received no reply. Yes I did send a recipe, not for him to follow, but because that particular recipe clearly stated that the whole point of bubble and squeak was that it should be crisp on the outside. When I received no reply I did not follow it up, and in fact subsequently checked out Franklins with a view to booking a space for a big family celebration, so clearly I was very happy with (most of) the food. The reason I subsequently posted on the forum was because the manager (I think?) was extraordinarily rude to me when I went in with my partner for lunch. With no provocation whatsoever and with no prior warning, he verbally attacked me in front of a whole bar full of people as my partner and I were ordering lunch. The waitress who served us was extremely embarrassed and apologised for him, but he did not see fit to apologise himself. It was that rudeness which was my complaint against Franklins, not the food. Various people on the forum then chose to interpret my complaint about this specific incident of extreme rudeness as my disliking the food. Again - you can look up the relevant thread and see for yourself. But I have to ask you why you choose to bring this up so long after the event. ETA: I did avoid Franklins for some time afterwards, because for obvious reasons I did not want to encounter this man again. However I have been back recently because I have not seen him in there and I hope he may be working elsewhere. ETA: On clicking on your name, ScotchBonnet, I see you have made only twelve posts on this forum since 2012. I have to ask, therefore, why you have such a particular interest in my having praised Franklins Time Out award that you chose to make your thirteenth post about it. And another one of your past twelve posts was having a personal go at me: http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?30,1584616,1595870#msg-1595870 This is what you said: "Never happy are you Sue? Always having a pop at local businesses. Don't you get bored? But more to the point do you think ANYBODY on here actually listens to you constantly slating places." I suggested you post links to all my posts where I am supposedly "always" and "constantly" slating places - but you didn't, did you? Couldn't find any, could you? So I guess that's why you had to dredge up something from years ago on this thread. Please either put up your evidence, or shut up. Thanks. And your post is particularly ironic given that I started this thread actually praising local businesses :)) :)) :))

LondonMix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I agree-- that's why I said whatever counselling > they need rather than everyone get counselling. In the article linked to by the OP it says "Southwark Council said the school would re-open on Friday and students would be offered counselling." ETA: So they will be offered it, not (presumably) have it thrust upon them. Very sorry to read about this incident.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Are you sure you're not mistaking 6pm for daytime? I remember it as being open in the daytime. I'm pretty sure I went there for lunch once.

mia Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > of course the post person pinched it,thats why > they go to work every day to pinch 50p phone cases > from china.after he gets 3 months prison for theft > loses his 25-35 grand salary his 5 grand shares > pension and criminal record for life. he can sit > in his cell knowing that the 25p he got for the > phone case is stashed away for when he gets out. Obviously not every missing item is theft. However if a pattern of missing items is identified, it may well be due to theft. Somebody would have to open an item to find out what was in it, and once it was opened they would have to close it again without making it obvious it had been opened, so they may well just dispose of it. And sorry, but theft from the post does happen, whether or not you prefer to think it doesn't. Obviously the vast majority of postmen and women are honest, but as in any job, a few are not.

"Is this still for sale?" :)) :)) :))

> DJKillaQueen Wrote: > -------------------- > > ...numbers, LM, Sue and RD all know each other > in person. Laddy Muck Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > If by "LM" you mean me, your assertion is quite > wrong. "DJ makes inaccurate assertion with total confidence" shock. Oh no, hang on - not a shock.

Pugwash Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- I do not use on line banking and > never will. Whilst I respect your decision, obviously, it wouldn't be an exaggeration to say that telephone (and then online) banking changed my life in terms of convenience and the massive amount of time saved. First Direct are brilliant, and also have excellent customer service. It's not just me who thinks so - they are always very highly rated in surveys and consumer reports. The only time I need a (HSBC) bank branch now is to get change for floats and to pay in change and cheques. Grrrr.

I too loved Concorde. If it was still flying over my back garden around 5.30pm (?) I really would not mind the noise of all the other planes, it would totally make up for it. As it is ..... R.I.P. :( ETA: It was such a beautiful plane - a work of art.

Reg Smeeton Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > These look like worthy winners and nominees - I'm > even prepared to believe this is an award based on > merit rather than 'who paid us the most for a > review'. It was done by an online voting system. I voted for the Ivy House, so I'm pretty sure it was genuine. Doesn't necessarily mean "the best" won, though, just who got the most votes :)

Dopamine1979 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sue Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > That is really annoying. > > > > I bank with First Direct, and I use that HSBC > > branch to pay in change and sometimes to get > > change for floats for > http://www.thegooseisout.com > > gigs. > > > > I don't particularly want to lug loads of heavy > > change to bloody Peckham :( > > Nice plug. I like your style. :) And I thought nobody had noticed :))

DJKillaQueen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > For the last time I am not BB or anyone else. Unfortunately though, you have form. You have in the past strenuously denied posting on here under two names (ironically enough, after you had been slagging somebody else off for doing exactly the same thing), and when you were called out, you immediately attempted to delete all the evidence that you were also angetastic (you weren't successful, btw). So you really can't blame people for doubting your word.

Well done to The Ivy House - runner up for bar/pub of the year in SE15 (it won last year). http://www.timeout.com/london/lovelondonawards#/results/peckham/bars-&-pubs Haven't looked at it all, but some of the East Dulwich results are here - well done Franklins! http://www.timeout.com/london/lovelondonawards#/results/dulwich-and-east-dulwich/restaurants Delighted to see Blue Brick Cafe also a runner up!

Why on earth has this thread been lounged?

Some years back (before the days of the internet, sadly) I sold a letter from Keith Richards and a load of autographs in an auction. I wish I hadn't, but I needed the money at the time. The big London auction houses have rock memorabilia sales every so often and could give you an idea of what your things are likely to fetch, I'm sure. I can't remember now who I used, possibly Christies. They need to verify that the items are genuine, but I guess that wouldn't apply to photographs. They took a massive chunk of the proceeds :(

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Just a nasty pissed up dick who is used to getting > his way abusing an underling. Not sure race had > any part of it really. As I think someone already said, the amount of compensation awarded can be higher if race (as legally defined for the purposes of the relevant act) was a component. So if the vile Clarkson at some point during his tirade/assault called the guy "an Irish (insert insult here)" then that could be sufficient to get the compensation upped. I'm just surmising, but I'm guessing he took legal advice and that might have been suggested. I'm assuming there were witnesses who could back up what exactly Clarkson said. ETA: So the assault wasn't because he was Irish, ie wasn't racially motivated, but if "Irish" had been used as part of it, that could be enough? ETA: In a previous life I used to know about this stuff - no longer :))

Here's a link explaining how to make a complaint http://www.royalmail.com/personal/help-and-support/how-do-I-make-a-complaint If Royal Mail receive complaints of missing mail which indicate a pattern, eg mail associated with a particular delivery office, they will investigate. They have a dedicated investigation department for things like this - and postmen/women do get caught, and do get prosecuted (as well as sacked .....) The Royal Mail staff newspaper Courier names and shames every so often, presumably to discourage others. But they can do nothing unless they have the information about the missing mail in the first place. And for obvious reasons, better to report it centrally even if you have already told somebody at the relevant delivery office.

That's a bit rich coming from you.