edcam

Those with kids will always get defensive, those without will always be pissed off that those with kids think they're more important. Tis the way of the world, so calm down people.

chantelle Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > well get over it because children in pubs are a > feature of modern life and half the pubs in this > country would be out of business without the food > receipts from families. There are pubs to cater to > all sorts so it shouldn't be hard to find those > without children about. There will also always be > badly-behaved children - and adults - you don't > have to look far for either but it's not fair to > make sweeping statements. > > The phrase "get over it" invariably accompanies a post like this. There's no "get over it" about it. Pubs just aren't the place for children. Restaurants are fine if the kids are well behaved but pubs, no.

Kids shouldn't be in pubs. The garden maybe, as long as they're quiet.

What Rosie said.

Never had any problems with Virgin. We changed to them from Sky 3 years ago and have been v pleased with them.

Perhaps you should try talking to him about it. Lots of people have disturbed sleep, it doesn't mean there's necessarily anything to worry about. Why do you start every word with a capital letter?

You HAVE to go to Coolings in Knockholt, the other side of Bromley. It's about a 35 min drive from ED and has the best selection probably in the South East. We seem to end up there at least 5 or 6 times a year! www.Coolings.co.uk It really is miles better than Ruxley Manor.

None of them are great on Brick Lane to be honest.

titch juicy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Jeremy Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Frank's is an interesting idea, but probably > best > > if you drive. > > > > The journey up to the top of the car park - > either > > via that lift, or negotiating the maze of dark > > corridors - is none too tempting. I'm not too > keen > > on walking through that part of Peckham at > night > > either. > > > why not? might one of the nasty dark brown people > get you? > > there's nothing at all wrong with 'that part of > peckham' at night- in fact i'd rather walk along > rye lane on a friday night than amongst the hordes > of drunken fools on lordship lane If you think Lordship Lane is safer than Rye Lane you're a fool. Personally fine about going down there but wouldn't do it on my own.

That'll really calm him down DaveR - well done!

Ted Max Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Who do you think you are? > Runnin' 'round leaving scars > Collecting your jar of hearts > And tearing love apart > You're gonna catch a cold > From the ice inside your soul > So don't come back for me > Who do you think you are? > > Sniffle. So what are we drinking, Edcam, five > years later, with that little celebration of "I'm > so over you, baby"? Unchilled vodka from the > bottle, yesterday's underpants gathering your > tears in your lap, A Place in the Bastard Sun on > mute in the background? I'd drink meths in order to avoid having to listen to that song again! Those lyrics are APPALLING!!

Hopefully imprisoned for their tastes in both music and wine. Sorry Ted - ditto for those who like "Jar of Hearts". I wish that woman would shut up, or at least tell us what she's done with her "Tub of Kidneys" and her "Pot of Spleens".

Bumped to try and prevent any more epetition threads!

It seems to change all the time but at the moment they say that you won't be able to go direct to London Bridge but the Victoria service will remain (although down to 4 trains an hour.) This will probably all change (particularly bearing in mind the proximity of the hospital to Denmark Hill Station) but see here for tfl map of how it will all look next year.

Hasn't it been decided that the Denmark Hill/Victoria route will remain.

ianr Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Anyone here been banned from the Dulwich website? > is on the Sydenham Town forum. I love that he thinks he's been banned for disagreeing. I thought it might have been for his abusive posts?!

Epetitions are the refuge of the lazy. What's wrong with writing a letter? What bothers me about them is that there will always be 100,000 that would sign up to something. Some great causes and beliefs, it's true but if the Daily Mail decided to mobilise in favour of say capital punishment or the downgrading of gay rights, there will easily be 100,000 tha will sign it once it goes viral, without them really thinking about what they're signing up to.

> Why should I keep a civil tongue after you've > accused me of lying about my employment? Now > that's offensive. Not racist, just downright > spiteful. I mean, say you've got kids, and I call > bullshit to score points. Would you remain polite? > I think not, somehow. You really aren't in the position to accuse others of being impolite judging by some of your unpleasant posts in this thread.

What a depressing view of the world you have Rick.

Yes, right wing AND hypocritical!

The other thread is just as clear. And it's just as stupid an idea regardless of how many threads there are about it.

Another thread about this ridiculous and foolish idea?

OP - you're right about the jokes - they're bad!

I expect they'll move the access point according to what work they're doing, and resiting the oyster touch-in pads is probably impractical. The bridge doesn't feel particularly solid though - I was late in this morning so it wasn't that busy so slightly dreading being on it when it's crowded! Still not as stupid as the new position of the pedestrian crossing outside the station though.

cmck83 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > They need to pay back the cost of what they have > done in some way though. Sending them to prison > will cost even more money, and we all know there > aren't enough spaces. In another thread I talked > about something like what the Criminal Assets > Bureau do in Ireland. They seize personal > possessions and auction them to take back what is > owed to society ( in money terms). Too harsh or > fitting concidering the looting? If a kid gets his > BB and X box seized and sold it could teach them a > lesson in empathy perhaps? Or not? What do you > think? I think that's not a bad idea at all. I see no reason why these people should live in any form of luxury, particularly that gained through theft and criminal damage. Confiscation of assets is one thing but removal of basic benefits is another and would be utterly self-defeating. If unemployed then these benefits really should be dependent upon them carrying out a considerable amount of supervised community service.