DuncanW

Greene King own Metropolitan Pub Co, which in turn owns local pubs The Bishop, The Actress and The Angel Oak (Peckham Rye Hotel) Those pubs may or may not be to your taste, but they're far cry from the GK dross of Chef and Brewer, Hungry Horse etc..

Had tickets for Young Fathers at Hammersmith but then couldn't go at the very last minute - gutted!! Saw Lankum in the Summer which was pretty intense.

'Most of the summer'....?

Or a 'lifestyle choice'...?

Yes. I hope that's clear enough for you, and that's how pretty much all other cycle-lanes in London are. Proximity to pollution isn't the core issue here, it's creating a space on the existing road for cyclists to use. It's not even a busy road but it's quite unpleasant and a little concerning to cycle up that hill at the moment being tail-gated by impatient drivers waiting to try and squeeze through the fairly short gaps between traffic islands.

It's moot point, as that's obviously not what the council are minded to do. But it's not a path as such currently, it's part of the Common where the grass has gone from people walking along the side.

Why encroach on the green space that we have?

Interesting question Innocent until proven guilty is a criminal law concept. The Times/C4/anyone else are free to state/publish facts as they see fit. Russell Brand has a reputation for litigation and is at liberty to pursue further actions that he thinks he would win. He would only need to action against one or two parties to establish his case, any others would then settle out of court. So it seems that those publishing these accusations are VERY confident he would not be able to do so. This case/story has been bubbling under for years now and I'm sure that the relevant in-house lawyers are very confident no succesful challenge can be made. That is the law of the land we live in, and there is nothing new about. Also, the crimes he is accused of are serious sexual assaults and rape. They are not in any way 'thought-crimes' and the comparison is a bit icky to say the least.

I'm pretty confident both the schools and the police are aware

Apart from anything else, I'm not sure it's within the council's gift to tarmac over common land.

Thanks for flagging this Spartacus. I wasn't at the fete and was unaware this was happening. It looks like a very welcome improvement to me. I travel that way sometimes, often after dark, and it's quite unpleasant cycling up that hill with cars trying to muscle past inbetween the quite frequently spaced traffic islands. I tend not to use the dirt-track along the side of the Common for a number of reasons, mainly around poor visibility, personal safety and it getting quite muddy outside of the summer months. A future link up all the way to pedestrian/cycle bridge by Brockley Mews would be awesome. I often cycle that way with my kids to access the Waterlink Way and though most the side roads in Nunhead are pretty quiet, the strectch as you go past Brenchley Gdns always feels a bit dicey. Thanks again and sorry that you found the wording on the poster triggering.

Do you dislike cyclists, Dave? Straight yes or no will do just fine

The family have specifically asked for privacy. The Lord Mayor of Dublin has opened a book of condolences which can be signed online. All the messages will be printed in a book which will be presented to her family. https://consultation.dublincity.ie/lord-mayor/book-of-condolence-sin-ad-oconnor/#:~:text=The Lord Mayor of Dublin,to Sinéad O'Connor's family.

The whole cars kill more people than bikes narrative is just a distraction technique No it isn't. It's a cold, hard and measurable fact. Sitting beneath the hard measurability of that stat lies a hugely greater number of people whose lives are changed forever due to injuries sustained from being hit by motor vehicles. no-one wants to be hit by a car or a cyclist Of course not, but that does not confer a likely similarity of outcome you are far more likely to be hit by a bike than a car nowadays Source? Vans and HGVs are, by far (according to PACTS), the most dangerous mode of transport per mile travelled to other road users but no-one seems to focus too much on that do they? Yes, of course they are - but other than dweebs who ride around filming and publishing clips of people who have skipped across the lights after the pedestrians on their way to Dulwich park etc, there absolutely is a focus on reducing collisions with these vehicles - speak to any haulage contractor and they will tell you that.

I used to cycle down EDG on the road with my young child cycling beside me on the pavement. To go at the same slow speed as the child didn't feel safe at all tbh for either me or the child. So can well understand why some parents might go on the pavement when supervising young ones. The type of bike they are riding has little relevance, but if you mention that they were on racers/road bikes to convey a spectrum of acceptableness or otherwise, I would say that if such riders are travelling slowly and give way courteously to peds then that behaviour would be at the low end of that spectrum. The alternative for them might be a level of physical risk they're not okay with or being ,yet another family driving up and down EDG four times a day for the sake of the school run, and no-one wants that either.

I've no idea or interest in where Malumbu lives, but fwiw I can assure you there are CPZs and LTNs in Bromley.

D

Thanks Dave!

No probs and thanks for the other link. So, what's all the chat about Southwark-Wide CPZ...?

Thank you, but that seems to link for a scheme for Dulwich Hill only

I haven't received any missives through my door as yet, is there something on line to link to?

I still use it quite a bit. You can toggle between For You (algorithmic) and Following which I think just shows you the content of people you follow. For You definitely shows a lot of the nutters but I have taken to muting the really tiresome ones... but cripes it must be written into the contact at GB News that you need to Tweet complete tripe literally 50 times a day so that's a lot of blocking. When I use Following, I find that some of my followees are prone to quite excessive retweeting so that causes it's own irritations. I am on the imaginative handle of @duncanwellings FYI

I think one of the other big shifts with Glastonbury, is that regardless of what acts the organisers book, it's now seen as an absolute mainstay of a mainstream British summer, kind of like Wimbledon. There are loads of people (including me) who don't mind tennis, will switch the TV on for the big matches and would quite like to go if they could get tickets... it would be a fun day out right? And that's how Glastonbury is now, for a lot of people it's just a big summer event to tick off the list and say you've been to. The net result of which is you have a main stage environment which needs to hold the attention of high tens of thousands of people who are really happy to be at 'Glasto' but not desperately keen to experience new or challenging music. This was noticeable during the Arctic Monkeys set when you could see the crowd going crazy for IBYLGOTD etc but visibly drifting away during the newer stuff. And if that's happening to bands like AM live on TV, I can understand the bookers' reticence to push newer acts.

@Rockets - I don't mind where the thread is, I'd have no issue with the main LTN thread being moved back here and don't care if people want to carry on discussing it after all these years... I just don't personally see the need to continuously start new threads on the subject.

@Rockets, you make some good points there and I agree with much of what you say. There definitely seems to be a dearth of new(ish) contemporary headline acts at the moment - especially in the rock/indie space. Or a reluctance to book those that could be. I don't think the main stages have always been about heritage acts though - not to the extent it seems now anyway. I looked back at the line up for one of the ones that I attended, 2005 and the later acts on the big stages included: The White Stripes who were at the tail end of their most creative period - Icky Thump having entered the UK LP charts at no 1 the previous week. The Killers - touring their second album, Sam's Town Razorlight - had released only two albums Coldplay had just released their third LP, X+Y - Sunday was the day you expect to see heritage acts - that year they had Van Morrison and Brian Wilson. The next Glastonbury in 2007, The Arctic Monkeys were the Friday night headliner... fifteen years down the line and they look like one of the younger, fresher bands on the bill - FFS!! Compare that to this year and I don't think there's an indie/rock act who haven't been at it for at least 10 years MINIMUM on any of the three main stages. You're 100% right though, that the rest of the festival has no end of newer, more innovative acts so they still exist - they're just not getting booked for the main stages, and I'm not sure why. And also right that it is very white and middle-class. I'm sure the organisers would like to change that - they certainly book a fair number of acts who are more diverse/representative than their audience.