Moos

oops, wrong thread.

I agree entirely with Sean, and I think he made it perfectly clear in his first post that he had no sympathy with the abusers, nor was he condoning or excusing their actions. We all have choices. I also agree with Sue - I find it very difficult to read these stories, and question why it's necessary (for example) to reproduce images of the poor baby. I have been avoiding stories about him as much as possible, particularly as for some reason I am finding it extra upsetting that he was the same age as my son. However, the reality of the situation is that children are horribly abused every day in this country. I don't really know what we as individuals can do to stop it, but here's one local organisation which we can support Kids Company.

I asked about children and pavements because I once bollocked a trio of kids for trying to barge past me on their bikes, and when they'd slunk off Mr. Moos said that he thought they were in the right and were allowed to cycle on the pavement. I don't think any adult should be exempted, even with baby on a seat, or accompanying small kids. And yes, blinder we are all hypocrites. Every time I cross East Dulwich Vale at the traffic lights across from Goose Green school I dodge halfway across to make a quick crossing and avoid the dog-leg at the lights. But with small child in tow, I always cross at the crossing and fully intend to teach him that jumping across the road is VERY wrong.

So, who is allowed to ride a bicycle on the pavements? Obviously kids are - up to what age? Who else?

p_in_ed Wrote: > All I do know is that I think the way the Green is > organised at the moment seems to work very well > for all concerned. I think we should leave it as > it is. I'm not really fussed, but would prefer a fence that matched the outside fence. But I really can't agree - and quite a few posts on this thread would suggest that I'm not alone - that the Green works well as it is. There are too many irresponsible dog owners who ignore the 'no dogs' section, or allow their dogs to jump the fence. In other words, the current fence falls down both aesthetically and practically.

Shall we try it the other way around and eliminate candidates? I'll start by suggesting we eliminate the Magnolia. Nice pub, but we need to spread the love and not go there yet again. *ow, Piers, you can let go of my arm now!* P.S. cdonline, haven't heard 'none of my beeswax' for donkeys, took me back to school and made me smile.

Sean sezI hear you but I don't think you can lay it at the governments door - any government is going to have deal with howls of outrage from everyone addicted to cheap flights. Once again, responsibility for the problem is as much with the people as it is the government SeanMac, not sure I follow the logic that says Sue can't petition the government to reduce flights because people don't want fewer flights? Doesn't she count as people? Also, support for the Thames estuary airport = less noise over very densely populated areas. The idea is that circling planes do their circling over the Channel.

...and the Montpelier?

Michael Palaeologus Wrote: > Great to see so may new people. Anthony did indeed > walk into the room and ask Moos and myself "Is > this the East Dulwich Drinking Group"? A truly > insightful query which did him much credit. That was very funny. Looking back on it, I'm not sure why we hesitated before saying 'yes'! Top marks to Anthony too for rocking up without so much as a user name to his, um, name. Nice photos, Andrew.

KK obviously hasn't got her passport to leave ED. She has everything she needs within the parish boundaries, thank you very much.

They're doing a special when you see all 3 plays in one day, with breaks for lunch and so on... hard-core theatre viewing!

Now, now, PGC, you ought to know better. Look what happened last time someone said that.

I imagine the Christmas drinks will be popular so wherever we choose ought to be roomy. I'll go where I'm told, though.

Drat, 'sallright for those that memorised the emoticons, but the rest of us are left with a paltry ;-) and :-) and what happens if I >:_( Bugger all, that's what. Try again >:-( I'm telling you, no good will come of it.

It was all crossed arms and stamping feet and, "The Castle! There is absolutely nothing about that place that can even vaguely be described as yum or scrummy.? Brendan, your self-awareness is laudable.

No-one is sadder than me! There's only room for one of us in this town! *comedy loud explosion*

You'd freak if I told you the waiter's name was Pavlov, wouldn't you? Enjoy your pud, Andypandy. Oh no. This is getting worse and worse.

Yes, but giggirl, I've seen some saucy beans in my time. *goes off laughing at own hilarious hilarity. Saucy... see what I did there* *distant gunshot*

Could Mockers be starting a turf war by luring away Keef's Wire customers? There'll be blood on the corners of East Dulwich tonight.

*struggling not quite hard enough* Lemme adim! Magnolia, please don't get Black Sheep in. It has disastrous effects on the gut. Edited to avoid administrative displeasure

D'you know, I looked at that sentence, and hesitated. Then I thought, don't be such a pervert Moos no-one's going to read anything into that... Always go with your first instinct!

Come on then, if you think you're hard enough.

You laugh now, Brendan, but just wait. Without winky smileys, WWIII will erupt on the Forum in no time, as the irony-blunt folk of ED fail to get each other's light-hearted comments. I jest, of course. ;-)

That's a very good point. Plus Dr. No and Goldfinger were, for me, the best Connery fillums. What was the first Moore Bond?

Maybe not for this trip, PR, I've been reliably told this hotel has a great bar for pre-dinner cocktails Un website tr?s cheesy