ianr

Thank you. I'm tempted to make half a bucketload when the tuits fly in. I assume falafel will bear freezing?

I'm very grateful for your alerting me to TTIP and ISDS (which seems not to be a new thing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investor-state_dispute_settlement). I'll keep an eye on the protracted Philip Morris v. Australia arbitration that your party website mentions. It's documented here: http://www.ag.gov.au/internationalrelations/internationallaw/pages/tobaccoplainpackaging.aspx http://www.pca-cpa.org/showpage.asp?pag_id=1494. I'm glad to see that the previous challenges, on grounds of constitutionality, seem to have failed, though I don't know whether that's to be taken as reason for optimism. Do you have any examples of damage already done as the result of ISDS arbitration? The EU commisioner, as quoted in the final paragraph of the Wikipedia article, would have us believe that any future trade agreement will "fully enshrine democratic prerogatives" and will explicitly state that legitimate government public policy decisions cannot be overridden. On TTIP, see also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transatlantic_Trade_and_Investment_Partnership, which has an appearance of balance.

A few minutes scanning the top-level categories on the website and I failed to find anything obviously briefing or informing on your topic, so had to resort to a search http://nhap.org/?s=TTIP, to find several disparate articles. This one http://nhap.org/dont-let-ttip-deliver-fatal-blow-nhs/, with lots of pointers to material elsewhere, looks probably as good a starting point as any for anyone who wants to try to educate themselves.

My Beatle Drive is still running to schedule, thanks to Frankie "Keep them dogies rolling" Multi-Laine Highway.

Well, if you're doing that I may as well throw in my Commer Chameleon. But they're both for the crusher.

> One mischievous man's account of April Fool's Day, 1825: Via letters of note on twitter. Probably first printed in 10 April 1792 edition of The Looker-On; author The Rev.Simon Olive-Branch (pseudonym of William Roberts).

What the judge said in sentencing: http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgments/sentencing-remarks-hhj-leonard-r-v-clifford.pdf (45kB PDF)

You mean like a Beatle Drive?

LadyDeliah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > We all pay for transport infrastructure in our taxes but without > proportionate provision, cyclists are subsidising highly polluting, > road damaging, motorised transport users. Why do you keep on telling us this?

Cool.

Cool.

Ah! Thank you.

Couldn't avoid the bloody graphic (www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/dr-lol.gif) lollollol. Pass the apomorphine. Dopamine1979, have you had any other forum identities?

Come to that, a copy of this thread would do. Nevertheless, if anyone's interested in accompanying the forumite I mentioned, please let me know. She can only manage tomorrow though.

I've received several PM responses to my last post. I'd better make it clear that I'm not personally involved, in that I've no personal knowledge at all of any dog that howls. And I'm also not a greatly doggy person, certainly not enough to know whether, at least in some cases, what an owner was doing definitely amounted to mistreatment. I posted, to be honest, as in the message before that, in exasperation at the fact that, over years, nothing ever gets resolved - either through action, or in coming to a conclusion about what could or should be done or not or what other agencies could properly be expected to do. From the PMs and my conversation yesterday, I'm pretty clear that some of you do actually know the exact location of a dog that is said to sometimes howl unhappily. One of you has told me they would like to visit the owner, but not alone. It is said to be what looks a nice house. The PMer also thinks it quite possible that the owner could be ignorant of the dog's behaviour while they're away. Personally, if speaking to the owner isn't something that RSPCA do in these circumstances, when they have a very limited and perhaps not very compelling account, I think that a neighbourly visit or letter from two or three of you could be a good thing. You'd possibly be able to express your observations and concerns, talk with the owner, get a better idea of the situation, maybe even be able to offer help or advice. At very least it would probably leave you better informed. I just offer it as an optimistic idea. Though I'm afraid I don't feel up to taking part myself. Some of you probably know each other already, but if anyone wants to use me as a temporary confidential hub or relay, feel free to do so.

MissSophie> There is also an attachement of the public notice - clearly not public enough in my opinion! Can you perhaps attach it or a copy of it here. If that's not possible, I'd be happy to do any needed size reduction or whatever; you can PM me.

ianr Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm commandeering this thread to test an URL which > failed the Phorum Phamily Philter, so that I had > to leave it out of the yellow lines thread > http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5 > ,1308806,1309072. I'll try selectively chopping > bits off until it gets through, and then see how > useful what's left is. [...] > Now, can anyone suggest what it is in the string > shown in Result.gif that causes the problem? Now testing exclusion of sub-segments of that URL. &location-local-authority-1=The%20London%20Borough%20of%20Fouthwark It appears to be the three-character string 2 0 S [without intervening spaces] that the Phorum filter is rejecting. Remedy: replace the %20 (the standard encoding in URLs of the Ascii Hex code for space), at least in those locations where the next character is an S, with an HTML code for space - ie an & immediately followed by #32; or nbsp; [end of sentence] Et voilà: https://www.thegazette.co.uk/all-notices/notice?start-publish-date=2014-01-01&location-local-authority-1=The%20London%20Borough%20of Southwark&categorycode=G411000001&location-distance-1=1&noticetypes=1501&numberOfLocationSearches=1&results-page-size=10 Alternative remedy: amend the filter list.

I appreciate the appreciation, but I'm quite happy to be left out of it. Thanks. This morning i has mostly been looking up Hermione Granger, Cuthbert Cringeworthy, Leo Baxendale, Cadbury Report, Bubble Act, Markov chains, and "mainly been eating".

Sue, the text looks to me more like the pseudo-English strings generated and used, among other things, to fool spam detectors. In earlier days they were used in psycholinguistics experiments on meaningfulness. Have a look at, say, http://agiliq.com/blog/2009/06/generating-pseudo-random-text-with-markov-chains-u/, for examples. I don't know exactly what's been published where in your case, but it sounds quite possibly to be just common, maybe 'random', mischief making. Maybe not unlike the Bot messages that appear on the forum sometimes. Interesting though.

What do you mean by "provide a homepage"?

Impatient at the failure to locate this animal (first mate found his pretty quickly) I set off for the area this afternoon. Parakeets, blackbirds, booming car and van sound systems, even the occasional plane, but not a yelp. So I did a domestic architecture meander instead. But on the way back I had a conversation with someone who did mention sometimes hearing another dog that (in more or less their own words) would howl as if it had been left on its own. They thought that was from about a couple of blocks down Dunstans from its junction with Underhill -- which would put it in the vicinity of the junctions with Cornflower or Balchier.

Ah, a temporary trafic regulation order (TTRO). There's a useful 2013 Commons Library paper containing some stuff about those too: http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN06013/roads-traffic-regulation-orders-tros/.

"Barking/distressed dogs on Dunstans/Balchier Street" 15 August, 2013 http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,1164040,1164186 "Dog howling around Dunstans Road" 17 September 2012 http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,962061,962201 "Howling Dog Choumert Road / Danby Street" 10 July 2012 http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,918314,918380 "Howling dog in Crystal Palace Road ( ? )" 24 April 2008 http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,118407,118735

Thanks John. We're learning fast. So, as I read it, a change from A1 shop to A3 eat/drink-in establishment _will_, by virtue of the second of the now-confirmed Southwark directions, require planning permission if within one of the specified areas. I'm attaching an excerpt from the list of Protected Shopping Frontages that includes those in Lordship Lane. There's been a lot of thinking and work going on. The planning committee full March 2014 report at https://www.southwark.gov.uk/downloads/download/3640/protected_shopping_frontages-article_4_direction sets out the considerations that led them to override the default statutory permissions.

If I were a resident, I'd be seriously wondering if it were worth a punt on the belief that the yellow lines are unauthorised and hence legally ineffectual. But please don't blame me if that's not the case. Someone might also want to check whether there's any legal requirement for accompanying signs. The information, one way or the other, is out there and probably quite easily findable.