Sue

I think this dog is just very old?? :-S

I took some pics on my phone but they'll probably be crap as it's a crap phone - my decent mobile got nicked :-S

Third "no bouncers" :)

Anyone see it? Too late if not, it's gone :) Was very lovely - one of them very bright :) Made up for getting caught in the rain :))

A guy who bought a desk from me a while back was doing uni research into the paranormal, don't know whether he's associated with this group though, at the time he lived at the top of LL, I'll see if I've still got his contact details somewhere. He was looking for subjects at the time - research into ESP I guess :)

Asset Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I've used them absolutely fine for yonks with a > debit card but the first time I use a credit card > to withdraw cash, something happens. Possibly a > factor? xxxx Was a debit card they cloned with me, I've never used a credit card to get cash :-S I don't think it's anything to do with the type of card, just that there hasn't been a cloning epidemic in ED before, and now there is :-S

espelli Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If anyone has a good idea for something to say back > to these mindless, ill-mannered idiots, I would be > delighted to try it and report back on its > efficacy. xxxxxx Off-topic, but if anyone ever says "cheer up darling" to you, or words to that effect, "my mother's just died actually" usually shuts them up :)

SeanMacGabhann Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > > Before anyone follows that advice I would like to > see more people vote with their wallet and visit > > Hoopers > The Duke > Nuns Head > Montpelier > > more often > > I'm fed up of being in a tiny group in those > places - all of them offer something different to > the LL experience but we are poor at supporting > them I reckon xxxxxxx Absolutely agree, Nyge and I were the only people in Hoopers the other Sunday night, what a waste of a great space and great beer :-S Mind you we did get a bit addicted to the machine which has a music quiz :)) The Goose is putting on a gig in Hoopers on Friday 5 September, with The Woodlarks and Salt&Blue, plus DJs, if you've never been there come on down, it will be good (and FREE ENTRY!) - shameless plug, moi, would I?? :))

ratty Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Somewhere with decent music would be great though > (RIP I72) > > Perhaps even... GASP.... a jukebox! xxxxx Hey, a jukebox would be fab !!!! :)-D

SeanMacGabhann Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Re HSBC > > If I use any machines on LL it's those ones - at > least once or twice a week - and touch wood, > nothing so far xxxxx That's what I said, Sean, until this morning :)) Touching wood didn't seem to have helped :))

lozzyloz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If it ticks most of these boxes I'll be happy: > > An owner that's passionate about the business > Staff that understand the meaning of service > Quality sound system > An interesting and varying menu to suit all budget > types with quality ingredients (not necessarily > organic) > Comfortable seating > Tasteful decor > Selection of cocktails > Belgian beer, Guinness and a guest bitter > Wi-Fi xxxxxx Yeh agree with all of that, more than one real ale would be good but guess I may be in a minority there :) Oh and decent music, but guess you can't please everybody on that front ....

Simple answer - Change banks, people :)) And don't forget to tell your existing bank why - eventually they might take notice and change their ways :)

Isn't the point that you shouldn't make an assumption about an individual just because they happen to belong to a particular group? On average women might be less strong than men, but that doesn't mean that you can't be a woman who can lift heavy weights. For example. Nobody (I think) is suggesting that there aren't characteristics which are associated with members of a particular group as a whole - that's where stereotypes come from in the first place, after all. But don't mind me - I've got no idea where this thread is going now, and some of the previous comments have left me gobsmacked :-S

Re First Direct, just to say, they spotted the transactions attempted on my debit card today were fraudulent and declined them before they even went through. And then phoned me. I have nothing but good things to say about First Direct (though I've still got to wait "5-6 working days" for a new card - but they would have arranged for me to be able to get money out of a bank without the card in the meantime, if I'd needed to). :)-D PS though come to think of it they were once somewhat over-vigilant and blocked my card when I'd been the only one using it (ironically, it was at Somerfield that it was declined, much to my embarrassment) - First Direct seemed to think that because I'd used the card in Lickorish it was out of character and couldn't have been me :))

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sue Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Have you actually read anything I've written? > > I could ask you exactly the same question! > > I don't know *any* English people who are offended > by being called "rosbif", in fact most people > think it's a bit of fun. So by your own logic - > people aren't offended by it, therefore it's not > offensive. > > But the intentions behind the words are absolutely > relevant, most people are intelligent enough to > understand when someone's being spiteful or not - > eg context, tone of voice... these things have to > be taken into account. Surely you can understand > that? > > At the end of the day, I fundamentally disagree > with you - and arguing on here isn't going to > change that. xxxxxx Yes, we have a fundamental disagreement. And unless you have been on the other end of remarks/actions from somebody which have offended you, but which they think are fine (and maybe others do too) then you will have absolutely no idea what I'm talking about, as you seem to have no empathy for those in that position. Your remark "most people think it's a bit of fun" says it all - what about the others? I could give you more - and more serious - examples, but you'll just leap down my throat again and clearly you just can't understand. So let's leave this here, as it must be bloody boring for everybody else :)

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > I'm not talking about a bloody employment > tribunal, I'm talking about real people, in the > real world... where people don't pretend that > everyone's the same. Where we are *allowed* to > describe people by their ethnic group or > nationality. Where we can acknowledge and > celebrate our differences, and even poke gentle > fun at each other in a good natured way... and we > know where to draw the line. > > You seem to have no perception of where that line > is. As soon as someone mentions the word "black" > or "asian", you start telling them off. Life isn't > an HR department. xxxxx Have you actually read anything I've written? What absolute nonsense! You seem to have no perception of what I've been talking about at all :) Of course life's not an HR department - I used the examples I did as - er - examples, but the same principle applies anywhere - if someone is offended by something, then it's offensive, regardless of the intentions of the person saying or doing it. What exactly do you not understand about that?? :))

SeanMacGabhann Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > > We're probably not going to agree on this one > Sue.. > > The priority is to protect people from abuse - > but if we just ban things outright then we lose > the capacity to be human > > Mark's comment about me above is a case in point - > it might be true or it might not - but I am able > to see the intent behind the words. As someone who > was often called Paddy or Mick back in the day > when the intent was clearly less than friendly I > know too well what motivates some people. But > more-enlightened souls were also able to turn that > Mick statement on it's head and make it funny. > Again - it's the intent - not the word xxxxxx Well yes we may have to disagree :) It isn't the intent that matters, it's how it's perceived by the recipient. If I'm at work and a guy puts his arm round me, if it was a good friend - for example - that might be fine by me. If it wasn't and I didn't want that attention, that would be harassment, regardless of whether the second guy thought he was "just being friendly". Just an example. The same action, but OK from one person, not from another. And the same would go for "insults" or calling people "Mick" (if it's not their name obviously!) or worse. I agree it's very complex. I also agree that when it's taken to a ridiculous level it clouds the issue of what's acceptable and what's not. The difficulty is in knowing what is a "ridiculous" level, because something that I think is ridiculous may be really important to somebody else. At the end of the day, it's about being sensitive to other people, isn't it.

SeanMacGabhann Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Exactly right Jeremy - and I had been trying to > type a similar sentiment and getting nowhere so > cheers! xxxx Sorry Sean but it isn't right, and nor (in the workplace at least) would it be legal. A defence of "oh but I didn't mean anything by it, it was just good-humoured banter" would not be an acceptable defence at an employment tribunal :-S Edited to say: Sorry to be heavy, as you know I do have a sense of humour, but I also think this is important .....

Jeremy Wrote: > These words are usually used in good humour, and > such banter is taken in the spirit it was > intended. However, if you shout at someone in > public, deliberately trying to intimidate/alienate > them, then it becomes a different matter... that's > what makes it offensive. xxxxx Something is offensive if the recipient is offended, regardless of the intention or whether it is shouted in public. And regardless of whether the person who said it defended it as "banter".

Brendan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Shu.Kurimu.Sensei, if people say things like that, > especially to your wife, you are allowed to punch > them. It?s the rules. > > And sometimes far more constructive and expedient > than a lengthy discussion on the subtle nuances of > racial and national stereotyping. xxxxxx :)):)):))

Let's not get into a long discussion about this here, very happy to do so if you PM me Loz - yes I have been selective because if I picked up on everything said that I'm unhappy or uneasy about, I would be permanently posting and people would be even more pissed off with me. :-S The person who made the remark I quoted doesn't need to be named and shamed because the post is probably still on the forum, so it's there for all to see :-S EDIT TO SAY: This is in reply to Loz's post, not NatashaD's

I don't think the police/fraud investigators would just go in all guns blazing and shut somewhere down, would they, they'd want to watch and wait and make sure they had evidence and also try to trace the trail back to see exactly who was involved before arresting anyone?? Otherwise there would be time for the others involved to get away, no?? Not that I know anything at all about how the police or fraud departments work, lol! I just know the police were mega uninterested when I had two cards stolen once :-S but that was a one-off, not like this epidemic now :-S EDIT: Anyway you can't just shut somewhere down, it might be that the owner/manager/whoever had nothing to do with whatever was going on :)

f*****g hell, I've just had a call from First Direct fraud department, my debit card has been cloned too (attempts declined) and they've cancelled it. Just to let you know, the card companies and police are acting on information received, they know there is a problem in East Dulwich and they are investigating. :-S Now I'm going to phone my credit card company as I've used that round here recently too :-S

Administrator Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Message sent to NatashaD: > > You have been told about this before. The original > poster has stated that they have been racially > abused yet you refuse to understand that they feel > abused and therefore, with a lack of > understanding, you abuse them further. Do not do > it again. > > Regards > > The Administrator > > > This is in reference to this posting previously > where a user stated they felt racially abused > http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?2 > 0,140553,142242#msg-142242 and were told to "get > over it" by NatashaD. This behaviour, whether it > is done because of an enjoyment of causing offence > or thinking it is amusing to stir up personal > anguish is wrong. Being controversial is fine > however being controversial for controversy's sake > at other people's expense is not something I wish > to see and encourage on the the forum so please > stop it. > > I hope you understand. xxxxxxx Thank you for making this clear, admin - I saw this thread and didn't want to comment on NatashaD's remark because of the flak I have received on other threads when challenging things people have said - one comment being "why don't you go and join a black forum" (I'm white, btw.). I am really pleased this remark has been picked up on. Maybe it might make the (hopefully few) people on the forum who don't seem to have much of a clue about the issues involved think a bit? Right, got that off my chest, back to work now :))

It's surely the card company or the police who need to do something (not that the police appear to be interested in card crime) - if an employee is sacked, they'll just go and do it somewhere else? I'm scared to use a card anywhere round here now!!