Jeremy

Whats My Name : The Clash

Erm... what happened to the UDT quote thread? Did someone complain to admin?

Atticus - UDT can speak for himself, if he feels this is bullying, then he should report it to admin and the thread will get deleted.

Do you think he works best within the confines of the group, or as a solo artist (and I stress the word artist)?

Also, I don't think this only involves swapping expensive areas for cheaper ones. It should also involve swapping desirable, large, period properties, for modern buildings that are cheaper to maintain.

Fox and Firkin. I've been to a couple of gigs there (originals bands). I seem to remember that they charged on the door. It works pretty well as a venue, actually.

TillieTrotter, you could be right. But I so badly want him to be real.

That's funny nette, must people would guess about 27.

Michelle&Sharon - have you met djsenior? I think you'd get on.

Oh, I do plenty of ranting. Agreed. I just think that it will be more positive to your cause if you focus on the facts, instead of attempting to smear the reputation of the company.

djsenior, you're ranting! Talk of "drinking dens", doing "whatever is possible to sell more Booze", etc. And how dare a company actually make a profit!! They've withdrawn their application - they've realised the amount of local opposition and backed down. By all means pursue your request for sound-proofing, but stick to the relevant facts, instead of all this nonsense.

Instead of fitting the results to the distribution each year, you could use data from previous years to determine the boundries. Although of course, that would rely on the exams staying at the same difficulty level.

I know there already council properties in Bloomsbury, Kensington, Chelsea, Notting Hill, and all sorts of expensive areas. I just meant that while it's not realistic to build new council accomodation in prime central London locations, neither should they all be stuck in places like East Ham or Thamesmead. There's a balance to be struck. I guess the "sensible distribution" would be primarily numerical, but would also depend on things like available land, current density of population, infrastructure, green space, etc.

Ms B Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Jeremy and El Pibe, you'll have to take my word > for it that that's how I genuinely feel. Please > find someone else to bully. "Bully"? Could this thread get any more ridiculous?

Ms B Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Jeremy sneering at me Not really sneering, just teasing you over the rather dramatic exaggeration in your opening sentence!

DaveR Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > LB Islington can sell a > large period house in Islington proper (delis, > Guardian readers and media specs) and build > sufficient cheap but adequate modern flats in > Holloway to increase their overall stock. You > increase it even more if you build the flats in > Dartford We need to be careful here. It is not in the country's best interests to push all social tenants into poorer areas. I'm not saying that we should start building council houses in Bloomsbury or Knightsbridge, but there needs to be a sensible distribution. The creation of very poor enclaves is a much greater danger than all this talk of property supply/demand.

A nice guy? Quite possibly. Either he's posting in-character, or he somehow lacks the ability to relate to other people and see himself as they see him. Neither of these is incompatible with being a nice person.

OK, with you now. Sorry. So yeah, we're looking at a 10% increase of houses on the market. Impact in market price? Probably. Spectacular crash? No way.

Huguenot, you are assuming that all of the housing would be released into the market in the first year. This is surely not that case - the report is clearly suggsting selling properties when they become vacant, not booting people out before then.

To be fair, any thread which starts by describing buying a couple of outfits as "exhausting", was always bound to end in farce. The involvement of UDT has at least made it strangely entertaining.

Apparently Shake Shack are opening in London. Info is pretty thin on the ground though.

I am really enjoying UDT's work on the personal shopper thread, but what the hell is that stuff about the free spanner?

Not sure what to do with the slugs. But snails... http://gordonramsaysrecipes.com/03/cooking-snails-from-the-garden/

Peckhamgatecrasher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If you are worried, contact your local priest who > will arrange for a blessing or if necessary an exorcism. I wouldn't want that job. I've seen how the movie ends... not good for the poor priest. Maybe you could try the Ghostbusters instead? OK, so there was widespread destruction, but at least the protagonists all survived.

rahrahrah, I think a lot of people would agree with you. The total area is important, but so is the layout.