peckham_ryu

Salsaboy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Is it an advisory speed limit or is it actually > enforceable? 100% enforceable, according to both Southwark and CPS websites. Police approach is to usually treat 20mph limits as "self-enforcing" rather than dedicating resource to catching people speeding, according to ACPO. http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/road_traffic_offences_guidance_on_fixed_penalty_notices/ http://www.southwark.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/11918/20mph_speed_limit_faq http://allpartycycling.org/2013/03/06/acpo-clairfy-their-position-on-20mph-speed-limits/ Personally I have no problem sticking to 20. I am finding myself embarrassed when I cross back into a 30 zone without realising, and unintentionally slow down traffic until I notice: the end of the zones seem to be indicated by just a single 30 roundel, which can easily be missed if you're behind a large vehicle. I'm often overtaken in the 20 zones, and almost always catch up to the overtaker at the next set of lights, so I don't think that 20 is really causing delay to journeys.

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Bic Basher Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > If anything we should be trying to get the > > Overground to run overnight to Peckham Rye, > > Denmark Hill, Forest Hill and HOP. > > I would love the Overground to run through the > night, but can't see it ever happening due to > noise. > Over my chained-to-the-rails-in-protest body! For exactly that reason.

indiepanda Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If you're after reviews, adverts and useful > information, then I wouldn't really spent your > time reading the lounge.... In fairness, this thread was Lounged from originally being posted in General Issues/Gossip. IMO, if having room for waffle and banality means more users, then that's more sets of eyes seeing the more practical posts and ads, so it all works out well.

goldilocks Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Would it be possible to separate out ED > Businesses, restaurants and trades into 2 separate > sections? 1 for shops / restaurants etc > physically located in East Dulwich and another for > trades. > > The section as it currently stands is quite busy - > and gets swamped with building services offered > etc, so its often hard to see what is actually new > in East Dulwich and easy to miss info on new shops > / restaurants / cafes opening. I think it would > be helpful to separate out these things if > possible. Similarly, there are so many separate recommendations for builders etc that if you're looking for a recommendation it's not that useful. Maybe one thread per trade? ("Experience with builders" "...Plumbers" "...Architects" "...Fitness Coaches" etc). As it stands, it's constant new threads asking for recommendations for the same thing that was asked for last week, and constant one off recommendations (or occasional warnings) about some or other business.

I moved here 5 or so years ago knowing full well the extent of aircraft noise over my house, so it could be argued that I shouldn't expect anything less than the constant coming and going of passing planes. Even so, if there are viable ways of reducing the noise a bit - like sending half the flights by some other route, or changing the descent profile so that they pass much higher in the sky - then I see no reason not to encourage the airports to make those changes. Sitting outside last night in the sweltering heat, I could hear nearby blackbirds singing and the welcome rustling of the wind in the trees. But that was only in the very brief intervals between the varying noises of the constant planes: some appear with a peculiar almost "pop" like whoosh, others approach to execute a crescendo of high pitched engine noise, and others with a more distant steady droning. I do quite like looking up and seeing all the sky travellers and identifying where they are flying in from ... but I'd still enjoy that if they were not so close to the ground or if fewer of them passed. So I don't agree with those who seem to be saying that we should put up with it just because it's our lot in life if we choose to keep living on the flight path. p.s. thanks Admin for trimming some of the posts in this thread - some of the aggressive name calling etc was just downright unpleasant.

Azira Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > On what basis could they fine them? Smoke-free > doesn't mean you can't have any fires - it means > you can't have fires via a chimney. I think you're right that being in a smoke free zone probably isn't related to the threatened fine. The basis for the fine itself would be Section 79(1)(b) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. An authority can serve a notice if a person is causing smoke nuisance. Ignoring the notice is a criminal offence with a possible ?5000 fine.

Wetherspoons keep the kids corralled in a family section, leaving plenty of space for uncensored beer chat.

Bluerevolution Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > call 999 and ask for the fire brigade "I think my > neighbours shed is on fire ", you're not to know > at daft o'clock- and before anyone says waste of > LFB resources it will only happen the once AND it > may be true One Sunday when I had burnt paper raining down on my garden from a neighbour's bonfire, I rang the Fire Brigade directly (not 999). Told them I thought the fire was in danger of getting out of control, and could they send someone round to assess? Then during the week when I followed up with the Council, there was a record of the incident, so they could write to the neighbour and warn them about the whopping fine they would incur the next time, as we were in a smokefree area. No repeat bonfires, so it did the trick. (The Fire Brigade did not sound enthusiastic when I called though!)

Whatever Tarot's having ? make mine a double

KidKruger Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > the leader took his top off and told Dave > to hit him in the stomach, harder, harder, > harder. Yep, that's their main party trick. Like Houdini's similar conditioning, it's impressive. I bet Dave wasn't invited to repeat his attack to any other part of the body though! I really hope that's not the main thing they teach all their ladies' classes, although I rather fear it is?

They're called KIXA these days. AFAIK the only London club is a ladies only class in Thornton Heath. Personally I'm highly dubious of martial arts classes for ladies only. If you're unlucky enough to need to use self defence skills one day, there is a high chance that your attacker will be a man. If you haven't practised with a variety of oafish chaps, then all those classes (and in KIXA's case, breathing exercises...) will have left you horribly unprepared as well as possibly unrealistically overconfident. But anyway on the brainwashing, lots of martial arts organisations out there veer toward the cultish. KIXA has had a strong rep as one of them... but based on a distinctly rubbish demo 5 years ago in Bedford (before I blew in from the Shires), if any would be wee terrorists learned this particularly p***poor art, we would not have much to fear from them!

The Guardian has quite a long article on Foxtons and its expansion to "outer London": http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jun/17/is-foxtons-the-estate-agent-london-deserves?CMP=share_btn_tw Apparently 'Foxtons selects its new markets with what it calls ?granular? attention to local sales and lettings data, and increasingly sees its future in more affordable outer London.'

Sorry, haven't seen any of that stuff. But Khan's are doing 2 for 1 on skirting board ladders.

Apparently the application decision will be on 14th July Some forthright objections in the comments published online: http://planbuild.southwark.gov.uk:8190/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=neighbourComments&keyVal=_STHWR_DCAPR_9559963 My favourite is at the top of the comments : "The over styled, soulless, and slick brand is out of sync and unsympathetic to the urban grain of Rye Lane and its independent shops and stalls." Personally, I'm looking forward to a small area of the pavement which won't be an obstacle course of piled up rubbish.

The other day, when the time came for the Sun to circle behind my roof and cut off my supply of rays for the afternoon, I got to wondering where the best public sunbathing is around here. The trick is to find a place where the wind can't bother you whilst the sun beams down, and where folk aren't going to mind a little exposed flesh above the waist. Later in the afternoon, I felt a small pinch of jealousy when I ambled past a fellow sun worshipper who had found just such a spot. In the lee of some trees but in the full beam of the late afternoon sun, she had found an ideal patch in one of our nearby cemeteries. Apparently ignored by passing dogs and resident spirits, she basked gloriously alone by the headstones. Is this the place to head when the clouds clear again? It seemed far superior to the windswept Rye.

you're more likely to find a smooth bore than a rifle round here

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > One should definitely NOT be seen with a poly bag > in ED for fear of being slagged off in the street. Whoa. Poly bag. If that's a man bag styled with all over plumage in striking green, locally sourced from ring-necked parakeets ? that's street cred right there. In spades. Extra points if there's a "Who's A Pretty Boy Then?" motif on the shoulder strap. Don't listen to the haters. I'm going to start making one for myself now. *crouches on balcony with large net and monkey nuts nicked from GBK*

All forums have their archetypes for sure. Here are a few more... The Lurker - the "longtime listener, first time caller" of the online world. Perhaps still waters run deep, or perhaps The Lurker prefers to remain silent and be thought irrelevant than to comment and have it confirmed? The Dredger - will go to any length not to start a new thread when a search reveals any previous discussion on the topic in mind, even from years ago. The Dredger's motivations range from self-effacing to self-promoting and, as in the real world, opinion on the benefits of dredging is divided. The Derailer - determined that no topic should remain on its original track, it is The Derailer's sworn duty is to divert course to the Serious Issues which would otherwise have remained an unnoticed tangent in a far too straightforward discussion. La Prima Donna - the leading light of the forum, without whose illumination threads would remain dull and uninspired. A Warren Beatty figure for the local online world, a celebrity for discussion in its own right, or the unnamed but universally recognised subject of song lyrics and forum comment alike. The Campaigner - this character is either the sound, beating heart of the community forum, or is benignly tolerated for their ludicrous delusion that anyone cares more about the threatened closure of this or that amenity than about the Serious Issues solemnly raised by The Derailer, or about the latest drama of Le Prime Donne. Whether driven by the passion of the dedicated or the fervour of the insane, The Campaigner tirelessly plugs away with The Mission.

bobbsy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Thanks. On the survey they write this: > > "Did you know that you can sign up for email > alerts on planning applications on the website? I saw that too. On investigation, it's not quite what I expected: Once you are registered then you can subscribe for updates on individual planning applications, if you find some on the register which are of particular interest. That's fine as far as it goes, although I would really like to be able to subscribe to a regular digest of new and updated applications in my neighbourhood. (I have given that feedback in the consultation survey.)

...a KFC bucket. Plenty of foods I wish I'd never eaten (andouillette anyone?).

Hello Fellow Graffiti Sufferer Good on you for getting straight to the scrubbing. Leaving it there too long always seems to encourage more. When you have finished, if you haven't decided we should immediately bring back hanging for vandalism, then you have managed your sense of humour much better than I! You can file a report online with the Met Police, if it's the first time. On one occasion I came home to too much graffiti for me to deal with myself, so I used Southwark Council's online form to request their cleaning service. I think that fell into an online black hole, so I had to phone and deal with a lady who wasn't sure whether the service is free (it is, if the graffiti faces the road). I must say they did a great job, within 48 hours of my call. I hope your quick cleaning action has discouraged repeat tagging!

KrackersMaracas Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > (Skipping the Victoria and Prince Albert through > fear of blood poisoning) My housemate reconnoitred the re-reopened Prince Albert at the weekend, and now wishes to officially designate it as "our local". Worth a look.

bodsier Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If we get rid of the Human Rights act, prisons > will be bulging. I don't think Any party who > wishes to rid us of the Human Rights Act should be > in Government. It will no doubt be our biggest > loss. IMO, a misleadingly named, well-intentioned but ill thought through Act, whose consequences seem to be largely unintended, because its effect is left to public authorities (especially judges) to determine. Are there any particular valuable rights which its repeal will deprive us of? Much excitement about the Tories' plan to get rid of both this and the fox hunting ban. In reality, both are well meaning but rushed and poorly written items of legislation. It doesn't mean that the government is anti human or anti fox, it just means they don't want public time and money continuing to be wasted by trying to work with these badly executed laws. (Although they might also be anti human and/or anti fox!)

Day 1 of the new Tory government and already the country is going to the dogs: it's 7pm and there's not a single loaf of olive bread to be found anywhere in East Dulwich. Betrayed.

The OP's original question is fair enough, and is the subject of research by broadcasters. The BBC's research in 2012 found that: - the vast majority of audiences are comfortable with the depiction of lesbian, gay and bisexual people on radio, TV and online. - many lesbian, gay and bisexual people themselves feel they are still under-represented by all UK broadcasters. "Experts urged for more mainstream inclusion in news and current affairs, and more creative and realistic depictions in factual and drama television." ?perhaps that's what the OP has experienced. If increased representation makes some people uncomfortable, that's ok - many people who feel that way will come around. More details of the research on the BBC's website here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2012/lgb-portrayal