SeanMacGabhann

Isn't the vegetarian opening up on the old Chopsticks site? - as recently as 2 weeks ago that was the word The Vietnamese place I'm assuming just ran into lease/money difficulties and was so long ago it's not going to happen

So you didn't meet encounter someone who happened to be overly aggressive - you met someone who happened to be a cyclist and therefore was ALREADY overly aggressive Did she "try and run you over" or was she just selfish and didn't see you? The first options sounds premeditated and unlikely Generalising about a whole group of people isn't likely to win friends. Or influence anyone As it happens 2 different cyclists have nearly crashed into me in the last week and a bit. But compared to many dozens of drivers who were oblivious to me because they were on a mobile or refused to stop at a pedestrian crossing, I'm more wary of the latter

Oh FFS Keef! Probably fair comment about refreeing when that's the Chair's job and I'll take a reprimand from either The Chair or you on this one But I haven't contributed anything to the debate??? Possibly true , I'll bear it in mind

quids looks young for his age (git) - but the very young bloke I met at the end was jaybee22

To slightly contradict something I wrote elsewhere, I do totally get people wanting to remain anonymous and distinct from the online banter However ! I also do think that if you are in people's face every day it helps enormously if you have met them. I drive keef nuts online on a regular basis but we seem to get on ok in real life Quids and I used to go hammer and tongs at each other until we met at the Phoenix - now it's all family vacations in the Hamptons together (an example there of exaggerating for effect) Online anonymity allows a lot of people to not have to think or respect who they are talking to - something that's a bit harder when you have met people in real life. The likes of Ted, *Bob* etc tend to have that level of thought already built in so it works for them All of my opinions above tend to be specifically about the EDF mind - because it's a local community I think meeting people is part and parcel. I have no interest in meeting anyone from other national/global forums (forae?)

keef - yeah, I was thinking of *bob* as I typed that as an example to disprove my point! doh... I didn't mean to sound as harsh good point too quids..

You would think wouldn't you? As ever, I think Jeremy has got it about right. When Moz returned recently he seemed more "genuine" than his initial incarnation But hey, I never trust anyone who prefers anonymity on a local forum to showing their face at least once. That does't mean I don't like the persona, just that I don't trust it

I think your post got moved because it's about the forum and not ED gossip - so it's now in the "About this Forum" section Chalk me up as a cat person tho...

Which isn't to discount Nero's concerns COMPLETELY to be fair - there is a valid argument to be had about how resources get managed etc - But yeah friends of mine in America have either expressed how fearful they are of "losing" insurance or, in a most recent case, insurance didn't cover an illness so bang 50 grand of life savings - gone

So that 50 million or so people without insurance don't end up with mega-thousand bills ? In any case the question isn't "does the US want an NHS" - it's why do opponents of any kind of free healthcare have to brand people as "evil and orwellian"

go on quids, you have this one...

if you go to the "front" page here you can click "Reset New Posts" for each section quickly

It's Franks Campari Bar - on top of the multi story car park in Peckham - it's ace http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?20,299280,323789#msg-323789 Only in existence umtil next month mind...

ooh I think we have done it again! Let's not post for 10 mins

I hear you Hal - but without substantive facts it's all smoke and mirrors isn't it? I have no reason to doubt you - but then again without anything more you could be any fantasist claiming "they" are out to get you I don't WANT to doubt you. But I have friends who claim similar things to you. And in their case.... it's bobbins. I'm an Irishman who has had his phone tapped in the 80s. I know "they" can be paranoid and wrong. But rampant corruption..? Even if everything you know is true - that just amounts to a singular case. Rampant corruption as you describe it? I don't buy it...

A girl?? Legal is ALL WOMAN

Hmmmm You can't have it both ways Hal - You are an intelligent bloke with much to say, and a need to say it To turn around and say "Everything I say is with tongue firmly in cheek." is disingenuous I would have to re-read this whole thread and think "oh, he was being tongue in cheek" and i don't think that's true You have plenty to say, so say it, stand by it but listen to counter-arguments and if need be change your position. No crime there

Well, "distantly" sounds a necessity

Has BBW taken over your account?

But my last post is a bit too negative - you haven't crossed any lines and you are the main contributor to the debate - keep it coming. It just reads as a bit TOO "it's only paranoia if it's not true" and Huguenot is probing that angle only for you to be a bit too prickly The basic premise: UK versus most other countries in the world (corruption wise) - score Huguenot UK is a bit more dodgy than MOST PEOPLE know.. probably score you Bigger point of RAMPANT corruption in the sense it affects people's lives.. I don't think so. We are still living on the sunny side of the hill compared to almost anywhere else. It does us well to keep that in check but it does us badly to overstate the case that THEY are agin us...

At best, it's passive aggressive, at worst.. .well, less passive If I quote you you will say it's taken out of context. But as you ask... or more significantly

dear GOD Rosie don't do that again - I thought someone had murdered this Somebody Up There Likes Me

This thread is ever-more-bizaare Huguenot seems to making some balanced points and Hal is over-compensating whilst making some over-earnest-but-not-out-of-order reposts. Hostility is coming from Hal tho - I mean suggests a mis-understanding of "rampant" and "ubiquitous" at best... Hal - you have some decent points to make - but don't spoil them by overplaying your hand....

err... no I haven't. But if it's a topic worth discussing (and there is merit there) can I suggest a new thread?

Cheers for the link Crystal Fear But it is a rubbish article isn't it? Like most Economist spiel The line that stood out for me was "and it becomes clear that there is much genuine anger and concern among ordinary people " This is becoming a mantra which justifies any kind of unreasonble behaviour: "I am an ordinary person and I am angry and there are lots like me" What I hope Obama does is to stand up to these idiots and say "you are angry, you are ordinary... AND????" keef - your point about extremist in this country is well made, but if it means these same extremists have a legitimate voice in 2 party USA then isn't that what the worry is. They aren't sidelined as extremist. They have a voice and power? I have long looked forward to New Labour being chucked out - but now as the reality dawns, and the Tories reveal themselves I am less inclined to do anything which will give them power. That will make me an accessory to more Labour shite but there isn';t anything they are chalked down to do which I don't believe the Tories would do anyway (including ID cards, regardless of what they say ) but there is much the Tories would do worse... NHS, The Tories and the future