ianr

This guy might be worth contacting. http://www.theparrotsocietyuk.org/lost-parrots.php

>Deputy Prime Minister I don't think we have one. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deputy_Prime_Minister_of_the_United_Kingdom

I've saved Admin's attached pic, 012-1.JPG [554 kb], quickly resized it in Irfanview (free at http://www.irfanview.com/, one of several free packages of the type) to 45% and quarter-size, and saved each as a new file, also in JPEG format. Here are the resized versions. Original: 2200 x 1650 pixels 554 kilobytes 45% size: 990 x 743 pixels 94 kilobytes 25% size: 550 x 413 pixels 45 kilobytes My browser even rescaled the original to half-size of its own accord, to fit it all within the screen, but some may not. I doubt that, for most purposes here, uploading anything above a single screen resolution is going to add value, and it's potentially going to make things less easy for anyone using a smaller one. I guess that many users are using 1024 x 768 screen resolutions, and that some may still be using 800 x 600.

Presumably no-one's asked Southwark.

Currently a limited M-F 'preview' service, Dalston Junction - New Cross [+Gate]. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/projectsandschemes/5011.aspx

Maybe just her birthday, or spring or summat in the air. There was even an article in yesterday's Indie about the pastime. http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/features/strip-club-why-are-we-obsessed-with-getting-our-kit-off-1950366.html That article mentions Spencer Tunick's naked photo shoots in Dulwich in 1986 -- there's more on the web, eg http://photoslaves.com/spencer-tunick/. Did anyone here take part?

HAL9000 Wrote: > HAL asked (paraphrasing): do we really need a new, GPS-based, speed-averaging surveillance camera network in Southwark? We don't have one. It's being trialled for HO approval, and then it'll be up to any relevant authorities whether they want to use it for any particular purpose in any particular location. Those decisions will presumably be based on criteria such as usefulness, cost and efficiency. You probably owned a computer ten years ago. Did you really need a newer one? The memorandum from PIPS Technology on which the news reports are based (there's also one in yesterday's Southwark News, http://www.southwarknews.co.uk/00,news,19201,185,00.htm) can be found in a House of Commons Transport Committee report, dated 30 March. It's at page Ev 73 of the PDF version downloadable from http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmtran.htm#reports. The camera unit seems to be the one already used for London congestion charging, with a GPS receiver added.

The zoopla site that someone mentioned estimated a rental income for this house as a figure that I calculated as roughly 5% of purchase cost. While it's unrented, the owner is forgoing that.

Huguenot's post has me thinking back to iaineasy's post on page 4 http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,447811,450869#msg-450869, in which he says: "In amsterdam ther is a system where squatting is encouraged in empty buildings but under given conditions where the squatter agrees to caretake the building and give it back in good condition, when the owner needs it back, if they stick to the agreement they are offered another place to stay ensuring low homelessness for the squatter and building kept safe for owner." Would something like this be an acceptable and practicable way of meeting and reconciling different groups' perceived needs and rights?

http://www.immobilise.com/about.html, although openly run by a private company, Recipero, is national, free and, it is claimed, used by all UK police forces. All kinds of valuables, not just bikes, can be registered on it. They say they have nearly 24 million members. I use it for everything, including my bike. It's reassuring to hear Otto say that the local police recommended it for his.

There's much more traffic over France today on this map: http://www.radarvirtuel.com/ A little intercontinental traffic crossing SE England, eg a couple of Lufthansa jets Germany -> USA.

Tinfoil hats?

Just twigged. 80s 447.

Aha. Emil Savundra?

"Save some money by NOT sending crew and cameras to ask stranded passengers how they feel." Absolutely. They could do the local supermarket Kenyan mange tout panic buying story instead, for half the cost.

A pied wagtail on Tulse Hill station this morning (platform 3). An amazingly precise and fast pecking action. I thought at first it was more like a nervous gesture, with the beak not actually reaching the ground, but then repeatedly saw it harvesting crumbs of food.

MitchK Wrote: > I'd rather support a local candidate. Good, sorted.

MitchK Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Not yet. Had the Tory and Liberal candidates on my doorstep though. Perhaps Tessa thinks she has it > in the bag. Parliament's still sitting this week. Even then, she'll still carry on being a cabinet minister, so may have other demands on her time. Is there any specific detriment in her not having been on your particular doorstep yesterday, today, tomorrow, ...? Come to that, I've had no candidates at all at my door yet. Should I be wailing about them all? Perhaps they all think they have it in the bag.

Domitianus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Can someone please take a pic of this women on their phone and publish it on here? Would help > folk to know what she looks like and if someone spots her the police might be able to scoop her. It depends what your aim is. Taking a photograph will be good evidence of that person's having been on your doorstep, and might also be useful to the police in making an identification. But if it's a prosecution that's wanted, it could well be that the evidence of more than one victim is needed. If that were the case, publishing a photograph here would probably scupper the value of any other person's subsequent assertion that they'd been done by the same perpetrator. It is not even certain that there is just one. It would also be the case that any photograph published here would most probably amount to a serious defamation. Defending any libel action can be very expensive and stressful, and not necessarily successful. And then there's the possibility of actual harm done to the person by the publication. You might want to argue that, however it pans out, it's all they deserve. You might still find it regrettable if it turned out that you'd made a mistake about their honesty.

>could you inspect the bike for sale and then if it's yours, tell the police? Do remember that bike frames usually have a unique serial number stamped on them somewhere, usually underneath the bottom bracket (position 1 in this pic) ime http://iapetesting.gomodesign.com/TipsAndTricks/BicycleSerialNumbers/index.html. A bit of 'smart water' or equivalent in a couple of locations is also a good idea. slater, thanks for giving good details of the incident - time, place, method, person, etc. I'm sure this sort of intelligence helps.

>This is the URL (web address) of the web site that is jumped to when you click on the Panic Button. And don't forget the Private Browsing option in your browser, so no trace left of your having visited the forum (or anywhere else, for that matter).

>That's exactly my point, the intent not to pay the fare, i.e. not having the >means to pay the fare has to be proved to be convicted of fare evasion. I don't think it can be exactly your point, as I still don't agree with you.

I guess the person who interviewed you was a revenue protection inspector who will submit a report to his rail company. I doubt whether it's yet been decided whether to prosecute or to claim a penalty or standard fare. In your position I think I would try phoning Southern's (I assume it's them) Prosecution or Revenue Protection Department, to get confirmation that they're dealing with the case, ask what options they're considering, and about their procedures and timescales, including whether they usually invite comments before any possible prosecution. I'd consider it important to make some kind of representations before they make a decision. Maybe on the phone, if it seems apt, but also backed up in writing. Far better that than leave it solely to the chance of a hurried conversation with a representative on the morning, if it should come to it, of a court appearance. A clear explanation of the circumstances and what my intentions had been, and presenting any evidence that they were consistent with my actual behaviour, and that there was no actual intent to evade paying the fare. One argument I'd make would be that to get to Canary Wharf and back from LBr, even without having got an ED->LBr ticket, and assuming you skip no more barriers :), would still be cheapest using a Z1/2 travelcard, so scacely worth the risk of a prosecution or even a penalty fare. The individual cash fares would I think be (not quite certain about the CW->ED, but I believe it's at least that): Peak Off peak LBr->CW 4.00 4.00 CW->ED 4.40 4.40 Total 8.40 8.40 Compare Z1/2 Travelcard 7.20 5.60 http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tickets/14416.aspx All the better if you've kept the travel card as evidence. Can you also prove that all the components of your journey on that day were necessary and took place? But do get a PAYG Oyster. Removes the risk, is capped at TC rates, and can be cheaper.

>and that i had offered to pay the fare or the fine right there, and as the law states for Fare Evasion, >they have to prove that you did not have the means to pay the fare at the time you were caught. No, the offence is that someone "Travels or attempts to travel on a railway without having previously paid his fare, and with intent to avoid payment thereof".

474 posts incanting the word 'Waitrose' in the forum since December 2006.