Sue

Thanks admin ETA: Perhaps Grok would either like to continue the discussion in the lounge, or else PM me and explain his (or her) post.

Grok Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sue wrote > > Do you honestly think a market like the ones > at, > > say, the Elephant or East Street would be > > appropriate in East Dulwich in 2015? > > > Why is that, Sue, because they're not white middle > class? Shameful. Because it's a totally different demographic. Why label the people of SE22 as "white middle class"? That's not what I see. Why label them at all? Why is what I said shameful? It's a fact. If you imported the Elephant market to North Cross Road, do you think it would do well? Or do you think a market like the one presently in North Cross Road would thrive beneath the Elephant shopping centre? If not, why is what I said shameful? Please explain. I moved to East Dulwich in 1991, when there were several fruit and veg shops around, a newsagent and cobbler in North Cross Road, a shop with old prams outside in Lordship Lane, no decent pubs, etc etc. The gentrification began soon afterwards, in my view with the opening of the Blue Mountain in North Cross Road. I have seen the area change around me over the past nearly quarter of a century. I don't think all the changes are for the better, but change happens and we must accept it. So, again. Please explain why what I said is shameful. Preferably without bringing skin colour into it and implying that is what I meant. Thanks.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Come on Sue.. You are a lot Posher than me.. > > I'm as common as muck :) > > I went to William Penn School. > > Foxy So now a) I'm "posher than you" - because I went to some other school than you did? and b) I'm a snob - because I suggest that your idea of what a market should be would not work in East Dulwich? Suppose we return this discussion to facts relating to the North Cross Road market and the roadworks? Because I'm getting a tad annoyed at your ridiculous assumptions.

maxxi Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Asset Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > I looked up Isaiah14 > > > > "For the Lord will have mercy on Jacob" blah > blah > > > > Not sure if there's any hidden meaning..... > > He's crackers? :))

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Me a snob.. You having a laugh.. ? > > I think comments such as > 'Do you honestly think a market like the ones at, > say, the Elephant or East Street would be > appropriate in East Dulwich in 2015?' > bears the mark of snobbery.. > OK then, I'm a snob. Never been called one before, but first time for everything :)) I bow before the clearly superior view of somebody who has lived in ED for 35 years and therefore thinks he's a typical resident. ETA: Have you completely failed to notice the change in demographic of the road you (and I) live in??? Why don't you set up an ED market selling fruit and veg, mobile gadgets, plastic handbags and polyester bedding, and see how many of your "representative residents" or whatever you call them flock to it? It's got nothing to do with snobbery. It's common bloody sense.

I think you're living in some sort of bubble or time warp, Foxy. What exactly makes you think that all the ED residents who don't post on this forum share your view? I'm genuinely interested. The evidence that the market is wanted round here is that sufficient people buy things from the stalls to keep the stallholders coming back with those things week after week!

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It was a real market selling fruit & veg amongst > other things that Local people needed. > Not just Pig Roast, Hotdogs, 'Street Food' ? > Unrefrigerated Meats and cheeses. Pop corn. > and a few 'Tat' stalls.. > > Does not constitute a market.. > > How often do you shop there.. ? > > The only thing I have EVER bought there is the > Tiger Tea, but the Tea Guy (lovely chap that he > is) > is only there one a month at the best. > Fox, the thing is, you are not representative of East Dulwich residents, or indeed of the twenty first century, but you seem to think you are. Why would the market sell fruit and veg when there is a perfectly good fruit and veg shop already in North Cross Road? And in case you hadn't noticed, there is a fresh fish stall, which you have conveniently left out, presumably because it doesn't suit your case. And a plant stall. And books, rugs and bike repairs. Why should a market not sell things like hog roast and popcorn? Both those stalls seem to do very well. And yes I do shop there most weeks. I quite often get lunch from the Vietnamese van, which is delicious and excellent value, or food from the stall which has things like fishcakes and very good salads. And cake from the Blackbird Bakery stall. And bits and pieces from other stalls, including what you term as "tat" stalls. I would happily buy what looks like delicious cheese, olives, brownies etc if I had more money. You really do seem out of touch with modern times :)) Do you honestly think a market like the ones at, say, the Elephant or East Street would be appropriate in East Dulwich in 2015? ETA: If you want a market which is still like something from the fifties, Peckham is just down the road .....

DovertheRoad Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This morning at 6.45am on Woodwarde Road / Druce > road I saw a guy hanging around looking into cars > and front windows. Have you reported this to the police?

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm sick to death with the amount of money being > spent to enhance the so called market.. > > It seems to be the most important issue in East > Dulwich over recent years.. > > With its Red Brick paving.. Road closures .. > Elevated paving .. and now Gates being > installed... > > There are more important issues in the area. > Foxy, it's not a "so called" market! It is in fact a market :) And the red brick paving was not installed to enhance the market - it was nothing to do with the market. It's been there for years, and if memory serves it was because local residents were asked for suggestions to improve North Cross Road. Several were put forward and I (not that I'm immodest at all, perish the thought) suggested improving the pavement, which was what was in the end chosen. Unless I'm even more senile than I suspect and have imagined the whole thing :))

edhistory Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sue Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Who?! Googling didn't help, before anyone > suggests > > it :)) > > > Sue, > > Ian Batcock is a certified SoSRA who works for > AECOM Ltd. > > He is certified to conduct a safety audit on the > dangerous surface that caused your accident. > > F.M.Conway AECOM Ltd is jointly owned (50/50) by > F.M.Conway Ltd and AECOM Ltd. > > There should be no difficuly getting Ian Batcock > to do an independent safety audit of the new > works. > > John Ah :(

Who?! Googling didn't help, before anyone suggests it :))

Going back to the North Cross Road/Lordship Lane pavement, I got off the bus last week and tripped over unevenly laid small cobbles (I think that's what they're called). Surely it's a bit basic that you lay paving stones level so that they're not a hazard? This whole project has just been appalling.

That'll be over six months then, for a really short stretch of pavement. How much have we paid for all this?

solar Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Surely after all this time the job should be > perfect first time. Indeed. Poor management, on the face of it.

robbin Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Isaiah14 you are as much a teacher as Jeremy > Corbyn is likely to be the next Prime Minister. He's a teacher then. Hopefully :)

We wish you a happy Christmas, etc :))

OMG I'm glad I can't afford to go to Italy or hire a car :))

Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sue, there is nothing attached to the fence that > is dangling that anyone might be able to trip on > or to hang themselves on! I meant when they are carrying it. It looks from your photo as if there is ivy attached (and lying on the ground beneath the fence) which would hang down if the fence was lifted? Apologies if I'm wrong.

Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > And the trailing vegetation is laughable....photo > attached of the killer vegetation.... > I think to be fair, that's a potential trip hazard. Lengths of mature Ivy can be quite sturdy, and if somebody caught their foot in one it probably wouldn't just break.

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Penguin68 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > 'Gun Down' is an active use of the noun gun as > a > > verb - 'gunned' would be a passive use - indeed > > re-casting the noun gun into an adjectival form > > (as 'armed' is adjectival). As 'gun down' > implies > > that someone has been shot, so does/ should the > > quasi adjectival use of 'gunned' (as in 'he was > > gunned down'). > > > Sorry now I had that second can of Stella, don't > understand any of that :)) Completely sober and I still don't understand it :))

Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 'Gun Down' is an active use of the noun gun as a > verb - 'gunned' would be a passive use - indeed > re-casting the noun gun into an adjectival form > (as 'armed' is adjectival). As 'gun down' implies > that someone has been shot, so does/ should the > quasi adjectival use of 'gunned' (as in 'he was > gunned down'). Sorry now I had that second can of Stella, don't understand any of that :))

To "gun down" can be used as a verb, no? But yes as used in the OP it should be "armed" not "Gunned".

Abe_froeman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You don't find that the junciotn now offers a more > pleasant and a better experience? The only part I ever previously found a slightly bad experience was the bottleneck on the pavement by the hog roast and fresh fish stands near Londis on a Saturday.

I agree. Months of disruption and inconvenience for very little (if any) obvious gain. Except of course to Conway's coffers. And OUR money being spent. Please let us know when you get an answer to your FOI, worldwiser, good on you for doing that.

Or photoshopped .....