Sue

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sue Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > DulwichFox Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > > > > I really would not of felt safe in the area > > > walking back home alone. > > > I'm certain I'm not the only one to have > such > > > concerns. > > > > > > Foxy. > > > > xxxxxx > > > > Dear oh dear, man up Fox! > > > > I used to walk up there by myself through the > > estate in the dark. > > > > Anyway there are other ways to get there. > > > > PS It's "would not have", etc, not "would not > > of", etc :) > > Man Up... ??. > So you are saying because I am a guy, I should be > able to Fight and be a thug. > Bigger guys than me have been turned over.. > > Having been robbed and beaten unconscious in > Crawthew Grove Nov. 2006 I am always concerned at > night. > Have some pics. but you might not recognise me. > > Ok so you have walked back from there at night. > Well perhaps you had had a few bevvies and not > aware > of any danger. Well that's when folk are most > vulnerable.. > > Foxy xxxxxxx Who's talking about fighting and being a thug? I'm talking about just walking somewhere without constantly worrying about being attacked. I've walked to and from Hoopers both sober and not so sober, in the dark. I'm sorry if you were attacked in Crawthew Grove in 2006, but I've walked down there by myself in the dark many times over the last twenty years without incident. I'm not going to stay at home and never go out just because I live in an urban area where sometimes bad things happen. Mostly they don't.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > I really would not of felt safe in the area > walking back home alone. > I'm certain I'm not the only one to have such > concerns. > > Foxy. xxxxxx Dear oh dear, man up Fox! I used to walk up there by myself through the estate in the dark. Anyway there are other ways to get there. PS It's "would not have", etc, not "would not of", etc :)

:( Dozens?? :(

Plusnet are about to increase their prices by a pound a month, but I've been with them for a while now and have found them very good. I've rarely had problems with the broadband itself, and their customer service is excellent.

Bloody hell Foxy, I've missed it all. Nobody came and told me to stay indoors! ETA: Did they find who they were looking for? I've closed my back door !!!!! :(

Jah Lush Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hoopers closed for good on Xmas Day and it > certainly wasn't spit and sawdust. It was a very > nice pub with a great selection of ales and a > fairly good selection of wine. There was good > music there and the comedy nights were fun. Damn > that neighbour. I miss it. xxxxxxx I'm pretty sure it didn't close down because of the neighbour. It closed down because despite Jamie and Viv's best efforts it was making a continuing loss due to lack of custom, and became totally unsustainable.

Brilliant film. Sad I didn't get to see the house when it was open though. Is there a list somewhere of what's where and what the original inspiration from the gallery was (if any)?

maxxi Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Goose Green/Adys Rd. mural - like something > painted on remand. xxxxxx Actually I think it was done with the help of local schoolchildren. There is a thread on it somewhere. The original mural had to be repainted after some stupid council employees dealt with graffiti on it by painting over the whole lower half of the mural.

david_carnell Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Could anyone do a copy of the Haywain on a massive > scale? xxxxxx Please, no!

47A Irford Close Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > DulwichFox: The same general effect can be > achieved with a sheet of paper folded in half and > held at mid chest height. Provided one walks about > with a brisk, purposeful tread one can get away > with it for days :) xxxxx Would be less boring actually doing some work though, wouldn't it :))

:))

Strange how the folk music gigs we have in pubs so often sell out, then .... :)) ETA: I think cover bands should be banned from pubs, myself :))

StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Didn't Jamie @ Hoopers have specific issues with > some of local residents objecting to evening > entertainment? I thought that was the main > stumbling block xxxxx There was one particular resident. Jamie did everything he reasonably could to address her complaints, including putting up hideous shutters inside the pub, but she was still not happy. Yes, they did have a French chef at one point, but it was far from bistro food if I recall. His first attempt at a menu was things like ham sandwiches. Apparently he thought that the English had not changed their food preferences since the fifties. I did mention this to whoever was the bar manager at the time (Nick I think) and I think the menu changed a bit. Then for a while (I don't know if it was the same chef) it included stuff like "a selection of breads" which turned out to be a plate of dried up pitta bread. If it had been anywhere else it would have gone straight back, but I knew Jamie and Viv through putting on music nights there for a while, so didn't feel I could complain. I recognise that Jamie was trying to give Hoopers the feel of an old school back street boozer, but I always felt that the decor could have been updated - in particular the horrid swirly carpet at one end of the room - without straying too far from that concept. I never much liked it as a place to spend an evening unless there was music on. He did usually have a good selection of ales, though. The pub really picked up at one point when Pete (I think) put on musicians such as James Riley who brought a much younger crowd down, and there was a completely different and much welcome vibe, but apparently Jamie didn't renew Pete's contract - though Pete did reappear later on. But the writing was on the wall by then.

footandmaff Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- They had a special on last night for > Shoreditch Triangle IPA for ?2.75 a pint; I don't > think I've ever paid that for a pint. xxxxxxxx The EDT usually has Lighthouse for - I think - ?2.70 a pint :)

I should have said, you can't have an outside smoking policy or law which depends on the weather. Far too difficult to "police".

edhistory Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > A greengrocer. > xxxxx Crikey, that takes me back. It was one, wasn't it?

Just had a newsletter saying they're getting close to re-opening! Hooray!

Thanks all. Fuschia, I'll be in touch :)

Jah Lush Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sue wrote - > > > > Are you complaining also because the upstairs > of > > buses isn't a thick blanket of smoke with > people > > coughing their lungs up any more? > > Obviously, you didn't take in the last line of my > previous post did you. > "And before you ask I'm no advocating bringing > back smoking in pubs, restaurants and offices > either." > > I'm not advocating the return to smoking in public > places at all. I'm sure once this good weather > finishes and we go back to cold wet and windy you > won't be complaining when we have to pop out for a > cough and a drag because you'll be back inside > again and not drinking al-fresco. xxxxxxx Apologies. And the rest of my points? Obviously I'm not wanting to eat or drink outside in the wet and cold. I'm talking about fine weather. But you can't have a policy or law which depends on the weather.

Getting a bit anxious in case my grandchildren (visiting next week) somehow get separated from us in a crowded place, particularly as they won't be familiar with their surroundings. Worst scenario would be the tube :( Don't want to embarrass them by writing mobile numbers on their arm etc.. Have left it a bit late now - does anybody know of anywhere locally I can get some sort of ID bracelets which you can write on with waterproof pen? I suppose something like they have in hospitals would work. Thanks!

Jah Lush Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- I just get very fed up with non-smokers constant whining. It's not like I sit around deliberately blowing smoke in people's faces. They've got the inside now they want the outside too. xxxxxxxx "Constant whining" ?? Where is this "constant" "whining"? Non-smokers aren't putting smokers at risk of obvious health problems, Jah. Smokers don't need to "deliberately" blow smoke in my face for me to get a lungful every time I sit near a smoker/smokers outside a pub or - worse - restaurant. Why should I be forced to either sit inside in lovely weather, or else be unwillingly exposed to cancer-causing substances outside? Such exposure would be avoidable if there were clearly designated separate outside smoking areas. If non-smokers wanted to join smokers in the smoking area, at least it would be their own choice. Are you complaining also because the upstairs of buses isn't a thick blanket of smoke with people coughing their lungs up any more?

Seems a bit early??

Does make you wonder where he used to work, what he did and how stupid his boss was, though :))

I can understand cyclists wanting to cycle on the pavement where there is very heavy traffic or for some other reason they feel at risk (though surely they should be pushing their bikes not cycling) but I too have been almost knocked over by cyclists going at speed along the pavement who don't even bother to make their presence behind me known by ringing their bell, or who suddenly come round a corner. And yes, those who cycle in dark clothing at night with no lights - do they have a death wish?

KidKruger Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > While I would never want to restrict anyone's > choices, I'm sitting indoors at pubs on lovely > summer evenings, rather than choke outside. If I > want a beer outside, tough. xxxxxxx I think there's a very big difference between restricting somebody's choices where it doesn't directly affect anybody else (eg drugs or alcohol - though it could be argued that both those could sometimes indirectly affect other people) and restricting somebody's choices where it does directly affect other people (eg smoking). I look back on my own selfish behaviour when I was a smoker (smoking in the cars of non-smokers, smoking in the office amongst non-smokers, smoking in a tent with a non-smoker etc) and frankly cringe. Unless a pub has an outdoor area large enough to make separate provision for both smokers and non smokers, and where smoke won't drift into the non smoking area, then I think smoking outside should be banned completely. And yes Jah Lush, of course non smokers die every day. That doesn't mean to say we should increase our risk of dying by having to inhale smoke just because we want to sit outside a pub in the sun.