titch juicy

malumbu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The Twitter sphere seems to be getting excited by > a throw away remark by my good friend (well he got > me a Guinness once). > > Here was my response to the world beyond EDF: > > Umhh, there are a lot of Poles in Britain and a > lot of Polish builders. The comment was not > funny, but a throw away one which made no > inference to the quality of Polish builders nor > the number of Poles living in Britain. > > Of course we have a special relationship stemming > from Pogroms (Jews being persecuted in central and > Eastern Europe in the early 20th century) and > World War II. As opposed to the US where 'Polak' > jokes were common until perhaps relatively > recently. > > I get far more stereotypical and potentially > racist remarks from supposedly successful and > intelligent (but sadly ignorant) people in the > burbs. My favourite one is - Oh, SE London, we > had to move out of there to a blue borough when > 'they' moved in ("they" in a hushed tone). > ---------------------------------- > > > Chiles just needs to say whoops, that was stupid > of me, do a nice apology and here is a ?10k > donation to the Polish war memorial. That coke > sniffing property tycoon on Final Score had to eat > humble pie last week after saying something that > could have been slightly derogatory against > women/women's football. I am sure that he is not > a misogynist. I am of course being tongue in > cheek about Mr Fowler's recreational drug > interests. > > What I meant to add to the posing above was that > things can only get better as my good friends > D:ream once sang. ...and, what did he say? Regardless of what he did say and did/didn't mean, the man is a grade A pillock.

to be honest, if you're really looking for 12 hours worth of music, that's roughly 240 songs- a BIG ask. I'd find some existing wedding compilations and just add your own bits

apparently it comes with a pretty good arm and stylus, but to be honest i'm really no expert i've had mine for a few years and upgraded my amp and speakers rather than turntable

providing you have an amp with a phono stage, or pre-amp and some ok speakers you can''t go wrong with this as an entry level turntable- you should be able to pick one up for under ?250....don't be put off by the colours in the review- it's available in black http://www.stereophile.com/turntables/pro-ject_debut_iii_record_player

It's a shame- I would've thought with the abundance of curry houses on LL it would drive quality up and prices down, but nothing seems that much better than average. My picks are surma and Dulwich tandoori but neither is particularly excellent. If pushed I'd say Surma was the best if only for their chicken jalfrezi.

kenand Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > titch juicy Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Cyclist and bus had a coming together outside > > peckham rye station this morning apparently. > Only > > details I know are that he wasn't wearing a > helmet > > and there was a crowd of paramedics present. > > He was wearing a helmet and looked in a bad way apologies- typo on my part, meant to write he WAS wearing a helmet and it probably saved his life this is very much anecdotal though

Cyclist and bus had a coming together outside peckham rye station this morning apparently. Only details I know are that he wasn't wearing a helmet and there was a crowd of paramedics present.

FairPlay- I just always seem to get stuck behind someone trying to click in at the lights.

There's nothing wrong with them really- just an irrational annoyance (occasionally rational). Just seems pointless in town- when you want as much stop start control as possible.

jonsuissy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > titch juicy Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > While we're at it. > > > > Cyclists that use cleat pedals on their > commuting > > bike- i've lost count of the amount of times > i've > > been stuck behind a cyclist as a light changes > to > > green because they can't get their shoes > clipped > > on. > > > > Completely unnessecary in town. > > > > > > How does it go? All the gear, no idea. > > So cyclists should have one bike for the weekend > and one for town? > How the other half life. it's the cleat pedals on hybrids that get me really

While we're at it. Cyclists that use cleat pedals on their commuting bike- i've lost count of the amount of times i've been stuck behind a cyclist as a light changes to green because they can't get their shoes clipped on. Completely unnessecary in town. How does it go? All the gear, no idea.

Men over the age of 40 should not wear Lycra- this is an important issue. I'm not quite 40 but have the decency to wear a pair of shorts over my cycling shorts.

"She thanked me, and explained that she couldn't stop to talk right at that moment as she was on the phone." haha!

Two cyclists undertook a left hand turning dumper truck at the junction of bermondsey street and long lane/abbey street, on my commute this morning. One was a Boris bike, one was what looked like an experienced lady cyclist (she had all the gear anyway). The bloke waiting behind the truck with me sighed and said, "they'll never learn".

LadyDeliah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > And commuters need to travel by car because....? They travel onwards from their work place- perhaps visiting many sites They have equipment They visit clients I imagine a relatively small amount of rush hour traffic is private cars

LadyDeliah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > titch juicy Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Henryb- is your wish that more people get out > of > > their cars and on to their bikes? > > > > Because, I think at busy times, rush hour for > > example, most people are in their cars because > > they need to be, whereas everyone else is > already > > on a bike or on public transport. > > > What constitutes 'need' rather than 'want'? I'm thinking mainly of commuters going into town- which although covers a good chunk of morning traffic, i appreciate it's not all traffic.

"The Gowlett will be back in Peckham. NOT East Dulwich." Suuurely no-one's claimed the gowlett is in east dulwich? "People living in Parts of E.D. will claim to live in Peckham. Believe me, they will." Trust me, that started a couple of years ago

franks opens wednesday to sunday

jesska Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > At the risk of catching boatloads of flak...can I > just say that we lived in Tokyo and I've got the > mama-chari bicycle to prove it, and the reason why > so many cyclists and pedestrians can get along > together on the pavements there is plain old > consideration for others. No one speeds, > pedestrians look out for bikes and give way, and > everyone gets where they are going safely. I cycle > on the pavements here when I feel it is too unsafe > or, frankly, inconsiderate, to drive on the road. > If the pavement is practically empty, why should I > slow down traffic or worry about cars passing me > within inches on a narrow road. I go slow, I give > way and if there is ever a situation where the > pavement is too busy or too narrow for me to fit, > I get off and walk it. On my current bike I take > up no more room than a mum pushing a pushchair. > > I just think everyone - motorists, cyclists and > pedestrians - should try to think of others a bit > more instead of their perceived right to the > road/pavement/etc. great post :-)

Henryb- is your wish that more people get out of their cars and on to their bikes? Because, I think at busy times, rush hour for example, most people are in their cars because they need to be, whereas everyone else is already on a bike or on public transport.

maxxi Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > watching the 50th anniversary of Please Please Me > - wtf? Joss Stone?...Ian Broudie?.. please make > the pain stop... Paul Carrack!? No you dick, > no!.... Glen Tilbrook? ah, mmn, yeah, okay fine. > > ETA: Mick Hucknall?!??!? what a dirty low down > trick, absothoroughlylutely NO. Awwww really? I thought they did a fine job tbh. Beverley Knight was something else and all the others you'd mentioned did it justice. Not people I'd usually buy records by, but good for something like this.

is that head really on that body? hmmmmm, some of the pics look like a decent photoshop job, but others don't can't make my mind up if real or not look at pic 16

henryb Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > titch juicy Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > "Changing the dominance of motorists in > general, > > who are in turn dominated by the aggressive and > > dangerous motorist would not only benefit > > cyclists. It would have a beneficial effect in > > everyone else, as explained above quite a few > > times." > > > > I disagree. > > > > It wouldn't benefit those who have no choice > but > > to use buses. > > Incorrect. Buses are mostly held up by cars. More > cyclists would mean less car congestion and bus > journey would be quicker as a consequence. Also it > would mean a less crowded public transport system > as a whole. Buses are not held up IN BUS LANES at the BUSIEST TIMES by cars, as CARS ARE NOT ALLOWED IN BUS LANES > > > It wouldn't benefit existing motorists who > would > > have to spend even more time trying to second > > guess whether erratic cyclists; > > Again incorrect. They would also benefit from less > congestion and journey times would decrease. Also > there would be fewer cars on the road so it would > be less likely there would be a collision with > another car. Car-car collisions are considerably > more dangerous and damaging for car drivers than > cycle-car collisions. Cyclists as a group are the > safest road users in terms of the risk they pose > and at being at fault in collisions. This is > unsurprising as they are more at risk of being > injured themselves so will behave in a safer > fashion. At no point have i mentioned accidents, collisions, deaths. I'm talking about inconsiderate behaviour, irritating and making things more difficult for other road and pavement users. You can argue the point about accidents etc with conviction, but i don't see too many people arguing about accidents, injuries and death. Your statistics say nothing of incosiderate behaviour. > > > -were going to pull out suddenly without > > signalling, > > > > - were going to weave dangerously in and out of > > traffic, > > > > - were going to shoot up the inside of you as > > you're trying to turn left, > > > > - would come shooting across a junction through > a > > red light, > > > > - will suddenly ride off of the pavement and on > to > > the road in front of you, > > > > - will cross the road from pavement to pavement > > without looking if any cars are coming (this > one > > is hilarious- not only are they riding on the > > pavement, they still manage to annoy motorists > by > > crossing without looking), > > > > - are cycling at night with no lights wearing > dark > > clothes. > > > > Cyclists break the law a lot less than car drivers > do. When was the last time you saw a policeman pull up a cyclist for anything except for going through a red light? Just because police statistics show more motorists breaking the law, a cyclist is almost never pulled up for any myriad of (admittedly small) laws. They are the safest group of road uses in term > of the collisions they cause and the risk they > pose to others. A cyclist is a lot less dangerous > to pedestrian and cars drivers than another car > driver is. Someone who is reckless on a bike will > be more reckless and more dangerous in a car. > > > It wouldn't benefit pedestrians who already > have > > to dodge enough cyclists on the pavement or > > 'share' multi-use tracks where cyclist believe > > they are king and don't have to consider > > pedestrians, or dodge cyclists sppeeding > through > > red-lights. > > > > Pedestrians are more likely to be killed on > pavement by a car than by a cyclist. More > pedestrians are killed and serious injured by car > drivers jumping red lights than by cyclists > jumping red lights. A cyclist poses less risk to > pedestrians? safety than a car driver does. agsin, "killed", "injured" etc...not my argument > > A car driver deciding to not drive and cycle > instead means less population, less congestion, > faster and safer journeys for everyone else. > > > > > All of the above I see happen many times each > > week. > > > > I see car drivers break the law many times every > single day. > > > This happens a lot already- an increase of > > cyclists, without extensive and serious > education > > for cyclists is only going to increase this > > anti-social behaviour. > > Cycling is not anti-social. Making an unnecessary > car journeys in an over crowded, polluted city is > anti-social. 85% of cyclists have passed the > driving test - this more than non-cyclists. I'm all for people stopping unnecessary car journeys, but that's not the issue here. Some cyclists are anti-social, i didn't say CYCLING was anti-social. Apologies for capitalising, but, you've twisted, exaggerated or stubbornly ignored nearly all my points from that long post to suit your argument. The thread, points made and replies are all getting too confusing and muddled. I shall agree to disagree (until something says something i can't resist replying to) :-)

bikes have outsold cars every year for at least the last 13 years that's what the article shows

LOL- she intimated that I'm of school age. Cutting.