Otta

I mean seriously, I used to be able to waste away a whole working day on here. It's 11:19 and I've squeezed all the entertainment I can for now, and am now reduced to actually having to do the work I'm paid to do. This ain't right I tell ya.

StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The idea that the best way to inject a bit more > interest into the forum is trolling doesn't work > for me So come up with something interesting. I started this in jest, but seriously I wish someone would start a juicy thread. They spring from nowhere (a'la fois gras).

We took our first daughter to WOMAD when she was only about 15 months, and it was fine, we had a lovely weekend. I wouldn't go to a festival that I really wanted to go to to see particular bands, because I know I'd end up disappointed and pissed off. And there's no way I'd go to any festival at the moment, because at nearly 3 and 5, they would just be too difficult to manage / keep and eye on / not lose. It would be a hellish weekend of stress. (I'm only thinking of my wayward children here, they are a nightmare for running off) Like the idea of doing it again when they're a bit older.

I've got so much work to do, but absolutely no inclination to do any of it, so this works for me.

Petty I agree.

If you do come, introduce yourselves to the lovely Louisa. She's very positive about people from Clapham.

Being as you've decided to post this twice, I'm going to put my response from the business section here too. IF you really were a pro gardener, and they came and did a bad job first time, why on earth would you use them again? You say you couldn't get anyone else, but if I couldn't get anyone else to do a job I still wouldn't go back to someone I wasn't happy with. This just sounds off to me.

I obviously don't know the people involved, but it's like when I read about the Coke takeover of Innocence. I'm sure the Innocence guys try to convince themselves that it's for the best and that it just means their product will reach a wider market without compromising their principles. Maybe they even manage to believe it for a while. But at the end of the day they were offered a lot of money and it was too much to turn down. Principles be damned. I'm not condemning them for it, I'd do exactly the same thing.

worldwiser Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Wow, it was really a model of franchising. The > staff were equally rude there according to > reviews.. remarkable carbon copy. Maybe they're aiming for the Wong Kei effect, where people actually start going there just to be abused by the staff because it's an attraction.

StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It's hard to imagine Picture House > behaving this way before the takeover Maybe, maybe not. If the original owners were so altruistic, they wouldn't have cashed in.

Imt gonna wear my jeans and a t-shirt tomorrow.

Well up until 53 years ago anyway.

Suicide?

Robert Poste's Child Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What's tragic is people are more likely to argue > with your signature than your post. That wouldn't have happened in the old days.

Your mum.

We put a bird feeder on the washing line a couple of years ago, and a bastard squirrel ended up chewing through the washing line.

Which I have to say, seemed pretty obvious.

Haha, not sure we want to be showing up on the Kremin's radar.

"You have to live with smugness round here - but must they gather and use an amplifier on the once peaceful open space?" Seemed to me that the actual gripe was noise related.

I've had to resort to arguing with SJ over the rights and wrongs of slagging off the Cherry Tree. We need a cat in amongst the gluten free asbestos sprinkling hipster pigeons.

cle Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don't understand why people can't mind their own > business. Even if it is a dog-shit ridden patch > surrounded by bus fumes, if total strangers > choose to sit there, who cares... more room for > you in the nicer parks. In all seriousness, you are for the most part right. BUT, if people are blasting out music (and I don't know that they were, this is a hypothetical), then people living in the houses overlookng the green could have a genuine gripe.

!!!!

Tigres Pride Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Otta Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > There has always (well in my lifetime anyway) > been > > events held on the Green, but I must say that > > people using it to sit in the sun / throw a > > frizbee / whatever, is a recentish thing. > > > > Not saying it's right or wrong, just an > > observation. > > Strange Otta, but I well remember sitting, having > picnics, throwing frizbees and playing rounders on > the "Green" whilst listening to some of our then > crowd playing guitars and drinking Scrumpy and > that was in the 60's and 70's. > Not so recentish, I think !!!! Fair enough. By the 80s it was just full of dog shit.

Pixies? Those Hipster twats!

steveo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If Stevie Nicks married William Shatner and > retained her surname, she'd be Stevie Shatner > Nicks Hahahahaha!