Undisputedtruth

While I accept that cars are more efficient and cleaner than a decade ago, these do not offset pollution caused by the rise in car ownership. The idea about building more roads to accommodate more cars is simply not sustainable and costly to the taxpayer. -Heinz- Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Cars today are many times more efficient and clean > than a decade or so a go. Progress in that field > is constant and I am > not sure residents of ED are in any danger of > suffering from car induced pollution illnesses... > On the other hand, lefty world saving do gooders > driving 1960' VW Campervans are as green as a frog > in a blender...So > maybe we should vote to force them to offset their > carbon footprint by digging us "normals" a shiny > new underground car > park under Goose Green. I recon the ratio of earth > dug up, to tonnes of Aquarious free thinking > Campervan induced carbon > is about 1... So you know it makes sense.

I remember drinking there when it was called Cheers and everyone remembered your name.

Great goal but RVP was given far too much space in the box. I thought the build up play was very good.

Zebedee Tring Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The last time that I was in M&S, there were no > organic dildos on sale - or am I unobservant? More > seriously, the invective against middle class > people (or in other cases against working class > people) on this MB sometimes goes way over the > top. I've seen articles in newspapers where journalists pitch this type of discussion as a class war/gentrification issue. But I think a discussion on this matter helps shape future planning policies in the future for building a sustainable community.

Network Rail opposes the idea of Wimbledon loop trains running through Thameslink tunnel as they would affect network's reliablility. Also, Wimbledon loop trains cannot run 12 train carriages, a key feature of Thameslink. ETA: The recent Thameslink consultation gives Wimbledon loop trains supporters a last ditch effort to save their direct through link services. It remains to be seen whether they would be successful. For those who have not yet commented on the Thameslink consultation, the deadline is now extended to 14 September.

Heinz, planning policies involves the promotion of sustainable transport for last decade. Hence why you're seeing less car parking space in new developments.

Zebedee Tring Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The issues before the Planning Committee surely > relate to the acceptability of the proposals in > traffic, parking and housing terms, not the merits > or otherwise of M&S and Iceland I believe it should go futher than this by looking at the economic impact on surrounding businesses and social inclusion on the high street.

Zebedee Tring Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Insulting M&S supporters won't help you win your > argument, UT, you'll just polarise people. I wasn't insulting, just passing comments on my observation. I didn't read anything constructive in terms of planning from the M&S supporters when they responded to the consultation. I don't remember seeing anything constructive in terms of planning either on this thread from M&S supporters either.

First Mate, do you actually expect M&S supporters to actually understand planning issues? They can't even cook.

I don't know where you get the idea about DH & PR having Thameslink trains at the expense of the Wimbledon loop. Thameslink trains already serves DH & PR. Still, it will be quicker to use Denmark Hill to Elephant and Castle (6 mins) then use the Bakerloo line to Paddington (19 mins). I've very much doubt if a combined ELL and Crossrail is a quicker route in the future. DH to Whitechapel using ELL (estimated time 20 mins) and crossrail to Paddington (12 mins).

Denmark Hill used to be called Dulwich Hill.

Medley Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Once Crossrail's in the game will change again of > course, but that's not until 2019. > Indeed Crossrail will give many opportunities. But Bic Basher's suggestion to use Whitechapel for Crossrail in 2019 actually involves a longer journey. It'll be far quicker to use the Thameslink trains to Farringdon and then change on to Crossrail to Paddington.

El Pibe Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Indeed RD, if it's hip to be cool, that's surely a > very very bad thing. > Those images are awful and not akin to my style. Think David Beckham and Brad Pitt, but better.

No Hugo, I have to disagree with you once again. Listening to the type of music and going clubbing with like minded people you pick up on values and attitudes. It was very clear and consistent what commercialist music meant to us. And if you look at Quid's post, he also understand the background. Now let's get to real real reason why people like you and others don't get it. Style challenged is one of them. Inability to mix in with the right crowd. I bet the bouncer at a club never allowed you through the doors. Sorry Hugo, but no amount of changing the cool rules on your part will change my experience in life and what I've learnt. Now what we're seeing here is a small core of people, hopelessly out of touch with style and basically inept, then using the EDF as a virtual world to make themselves look good. In the real world they are nobodies, the sort of people who got beaten up because no one wanted to be associated with them. Always last to be selected as part of team when playing football.

@EP, You said this I think UDT's definition is basically stuff he looks down on, which was an incorrect assumption and aggressive in the scheme of things. So I gave an accurate to explain the differences from our different circles. It seems to me that you want to keep prodding for a reaction and then use blame to say that I'm at fault.

My last answer was designed to form the next explanation to why we're from different circles and how you're not able make accurate judgements.

El Pibe Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think UDT's definition is basically stuff he > looks down on. It's a definition widely accepted in the cool circle. Unless you're part of it then you wouldn't know any different.

I thought it would transcend into this, where you confuse commercial music as making money. In certain circles, and this goes back decades, commercial music means lacking musical credibility.

Good like you said but it wouldn't get into my music collection. As for KK, I like the early Anita Baker stuff but hate the more modern stuff. I like early Luther Vandross but hated his recent stuff. Same artist but different music direction. To suggest assert some kind of superiority or grandeur of knowledge is completely wide of the mark.

I'm more of a music purist, especially in soul music. I remember buying records on imports at Bluebird records.

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Even if a funk bassist is the best bassist in the > world (which he may well be), that doesn't mean > that funk is the best music in the world. That is > just childish logic. > > Here is a good bassist by the way (playing with > one of the best guitarists > > > > I desperately want UDT's absolute favourite track > to be used in a TV ad, and become a huge hit as a > result! I just hope he uses Right Guard, for the audience sake! This was used for a Coke advert a few years ago. Another example where commercial artists nicked from connoisseurs. And from the early 80s, this:

MrBen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Back on topic. > > I'm pretty certain I will never go into some west > end shops because they are playing really loud, > crappy MTV muzak. It's supposed to entive people > in but just has the opposite effect on me. > > But that's because I'm that 35 year old guy still > wandering around River Island gradually realising > that I cant wear any of it any more (and should > have quit at about 27). When you get older it > gets much harder so most people (if they ever > cared about clothes) just become boring and play > it safe. A personal shopper sounds poncy but they > can help with that and find stuff in places you > wouldn't normally go and break you out of a rut. I tend use music as a rule of thumb to whether they're worth checking out. If they play commercial music then they'll sell commercial clothes. There are plenty of older stylish dressers about.

Oh dear, it seems you can't put up, can you?