ianr

> We are now on a mission to get agreement on Autumn pruning in future, if anyone can help with council contacts please let me know. [Thinks ...] What's the council's budget year? Any possibility that they're doing it now because they have the money to spend now, but won't do so in six months' time? With my empiricist's hat on I'll be interested to know what, if any, damage has been caused. When will that be assessable?

Gosh. What are the units – acres, roods, and square perches? Have you been able to verify/calibrate [*] them? [*] "even as late as 1820, a House of Commons report notes lengths of 16.5, 18, 21, 24, and even 25 feet" for a linear perch. (Wikipedia)

I went to the sub-committee meeting, and was the sole member of the public attending. There was also a reporter for the South London Press. The outcome was a revision of conditions of the licence, which will doubtless eventually appear on the council web site. I'll add a bit more when I'm more awake.

Di Martino?

Do professional dog walkers usually have public liability insurance?

> As long as Champagne Charlie does not have a court case pending press could refer to it...sure they would know how to word it... I suspect they'd want firmer identificatory evidence than one person's belief and a similar MO. There's a lot of money to be made from defamation actions, for those with the robustness to pursue them.

> but don't hop out of your caravan & into an expensive BMW to clock in at work. This is the one point that all you 'free spirits' have not picked up on. > This guy is a 'champagne-traveller': obviously earning enough money for a nice car. And when you actually get into the camper, it turns out to have several times the floor area of a tardis, and they've got three children, an au pair and a cat in there with them.

Woven (doesn't have to be muesli) can be decorative. See end of.

HonaloochieB Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Roy's brother, do pay attention IanR. I didn't think you'd be misrepresenting him.

> Goodliz, have a look at page 7 of this month's Southwark Life It has this paragraph, and a small photo (attached): "It?s a hoot" "An owl not seen in Southwark for over ten years has been spotted in Belair Park in Dulwich. The sighting of the Little Owl follows the installation of five nesting boxes by the council?s wildlife officers last autumn as part of a cleaner greener safer scheme. Nest boxes were also placed in Sydenham Hill Wood, Dulwich Park and Cox's Walk."

> Report him to the police, they will know where he lives and pick him up again and probably prosecute as he has been convicted before. I doubt they'll think there's enough evidence to consider that. But note that someone can be recalled (see section 6 here) to prison to complete the remainder of a sentence, even after having been released, as is usual, before its full term. > Contact the South London Press, Evening Standard,get his name and photograph in newspapers again I wonder if they'd risk any identifying reference on current information. But passing the word around the trade of someone using this MO might be a good idea. >You mean this man? / CHAMPAGNE CHARLIE / Did my work a couple of years ago Mr Clugston seems to have been quite fortunate in his sentencing appeals. And to have had a very limited career pattern. Makes you wonder about the usefulness of very expensive prison sentences. > poor old Brooks Senior tries to make a little poppy from the gullibulls in the SE22 postcode and people want his guts for gaiters. Who he?

Would it be any use as a poor man's goose fat?

> Now where were we ? "Personal, stylish and subtle", I think.

Wonder if it's the same mob that hit Croxted Road on the 6th.

> While many guests of the EDF Priory may relish the thought of perambulating around the fair lawns of the EDF Priory in this fine weather Please do not disturb the worms. They may, if willing, be quietly conversed with.

I would have thought they could do better in helping folk avoid that error. I'm also suspecting that a moderate percentage of people will include as visitors those who've been staying overnight 26-27th, rather than on the Sunday night 27-28th. The only explicit confirmation I found on the website is in the glossary, which I only discovered indirectly: "Census night is the night of Sunday 27 March going into the morning of Monday 28 March."

Sue, I think on 27 March you're going to have to recreate the exact circumstances as at the time you submitted the form. The alternatives – prison, a local collapse of space-time, decreased funding for the ED Home for Wayward Hamsters, whatever – don't really bear thinking about.

Members who have read this far may also be interested in consuming a piece of today's Woman's Hour in which (mainly) cupcakes get a deconstructive going-over. It's listenable-to as Chapter 2 ('Infantilisation of food') at the bottom of this page.

aspidistra Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "In business, Scientology is a very useful tool." > > Terry Leahy, this afternoon on Radio 4. Whereabouts in the programme is it?

> My house phone can dial out but when i call my house phone it does not ring but i can hear it ringing on the mobile > and after a few rings the lady says your mailbox is full. Your telco (or BT via talk talk) arranged redirection to your mobile when your line went down three weeks ago, but haven't yet cancelled it?

> Yep, in those two weeks I'll have changed address, religion, partner, job... ... gone supernova ...

> Remember this stuff ? Liquorice root? I remembered enough to get some, from the herbal shop just up the road from Newington Library.

> Since then, all attempts to log back in again have met with a Now back in again ok. My problem was probably a consequence of not having formally logged out after seeing the error message after trying to submit an uncompleted page. The log out happened ten minutes later, when the system timed me out.

I've just tried it online. Used my access code to get in without problem, saw that I had the right web form with my name and address on, completed a few pages, ending each with a 'save and continue', then a 'save and come back later', which flagged up as an error. Since then, all attempts to log back in again have met with a "The Internet Access Code you have entered may be incorrect; please check and try again.". Page reloads, browser restarts and cookie clearing haven't made any difference. Perhaps it's a glitchy or time- or session-limited error. It would be a strange system that accepts a login code and then permanently disables it for no obvious reason, so I'll have another try later today or tomorrow. Has anyone experienced similar or, better still, had no problems? I wouldn't want to put people off doing an online return.

... is shown in the attached photo? To check, go to here.