Moos

Sounds as though le tout East Dulwich (and Environs) will be there to see and be seen.

citizenED Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Moos said "Glad you said that, LegalE - I like 2 > Pints too!" > > and the rest, Moos: we've seen you at the drinks! Ahem.

Never seen him myself, but no he's not an in-joke. He's a gentleman that wanders around ED whistling at traffic and on occasion directing it. I think a photo of him was attached to the last thread about him.

Well, that's kind of my point. Most bus-stops are just a free-for-all, which is rather a shame (and as commented on recently by Lost Yorkshire Man, it's not a universal approach, but a new London approach). But in the station at London Bridge, there is a great example of a very fair and self-regulated queueing system for an incredibly busy stop where hundreds of people get the bus in a really short period of time. So it's extra annoying that people jump in. I'm going to go and lie down now, as I'm embarrassed that I've ranted about queues quite so much. No-one could doubt that I'm British!

tomdhu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > But with > schools, the parents of kids at Alleyns are > paying twice for the education when they opt out > of the state system. They pay first to Alleyns and > a second time to the state. Tomdhu, they are also paying to be part of a society when free education is available for everyone, which is beneficial to everyone.

No it isn't, it's a perfectly good queue, it goes from the stop to the bottom of the station and then loops back up and falls to pieces slightly around the station manager cubbyhole. But if you're 150th in the queue you're not likely to get on the next bus anyway. But then bastards come out of the station, look at the queue, hesitate and then turn left and mingle with the front of the queue. Grrrrrrrr again. Edited to say that this was a response to the good capitain, but for SeanMac I mean the queue for the first bus stop, the 48 and 149.

People who jump the bus queue at London Bridge. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

Surely we have to look for political spouses, not politicians? Edited to say that come to think of it, Yvette Cooper qualifies on both counts.

She's too tall for snorky

Glad you said that, LegalE - I like 2 Pints too!

I like it.

*obediently* Are you an orange, Brenda?

You did. louisiana Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- Perhaps you too are on Planet Noggin, > along with Jacqui and chums.

Yeah, and old people, and disabled people. Why can't they just get the hell out of the way? Bastards. Do they not know how busy and important I am?

> Brendan Wrote: Money has to come from somewhere and .. Jeremy Wrote: Well yes... but that's kind of obvious, innit? .... but that's exactly what super-leverage was all about - trying to make money out of no-money. Which didn't work. And hence the need for tighter controls and regulation.

louisiana Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > @ Moos > So you'd expect a 'frugal' MP to be taking taxis > everywhere? Perhaps you too are on Planet Noggin, > along with Jacqui and chums. Er, no - I just think that someone on a high salary like ?65k who doesn't buy outfits from charity shops or travels in taxis could still be considered frugal if she is living within her means. Actually, I don't at all see why clothing should be expensed at all, and I agree that somone who expenses his or her travel to the taxpayer should travel by public transport, especially in London. I don't know what Planet Noggin is, but remind me when this debate became about me and my habits?

Jason, I can understand that you're upset on your wife's behalf, but just so that you know, Huguenot lives in Singapore. Thanks for coming on to give more details.

bigbadwolf Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Lesbian Vampire killers says it all really doesn't > it. If I were family I'd disown them. I wholly agree. For one thing, I find the title ambiguous and confusing. Is the film about:- a) Lesbians who kill vampires b) Killers of lesbian vampires c) Lesbian vampires who are also killers (kind of a tautology, non?) d) Two unattractive men who would like to make sexist comments about and later stab to death gorgeous women who don't want to have sex with them, while pretending to be in a comedy.

Is that to have something in each of your hands?

As long as your skirt isn't hideously short, *Bob*. That would be so wrong.

Can I suggest very politely that the posters now rushing to tell Spirit that she was in the wrong now back off and call a halt to proceedings? Give her a chance to respond.

*Bob*, are you a Hydra, or a centipede? I'm getting very confused.

citizenED Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Had it been an extra three feet that would have > been more useful.... If It grew an extra three feet, that would be just frightening for Mrs *Bob*

Come on, Ted. You know as well as I do that admin was planning to announce this properly next week - what's the point of bringing it up now and potentially causing a stir? I was assured that our email addresses had been covered up when the list was shown to the business people, and I for one believe admin when they say that.

Heavens, Sarah, you are quite right. I am utterly busted as an old git and wholly out of date with what the young folk enjoy as their innocent pastimes.