DadOf4

Chief Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Why don't you go to Putney, Twickenham or wherever > to watch the rugby on pub televisions. People in > East Dulwich prefer football, as do most people. Its exactly that apathetic attitude to the biggest sporting event this country has hosted since the Olympics that annoys me. Yes, more people play & follow football, but maybe, just maybe we should just try to get behind this event, and all it brings, instead of telling people to "go to Putney". We've got 2 international teams training in our area (Australia & Romania both at Dulwich college) and things like this: going on. So, if it means I may need to miss a Crystal palace game in the pub one night, I'm quite happy to do so

no time to test properly yet - but the mobile experience is 1000 times better than current

first mate Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Why is James Barber pushing the original > proposition when a larger group of residents are > clearly against it? I do not understand how our > local rep is allowed to be so partial in matters > which could have such a major impact on the area? > We all know James personal views on cycling, cars, > parking and so on but it does not seem right that > he can use his position as a platform to push a > minority agenda, when so many see it as folly. Are you really suprised by this? Clr Barber has got massive form on this, he will not change and IMO is the worst sort of politician. Personal & party agenda over reflecting the views of his voters. For those not around at the time, you can witness exactly the same behavior during his shameless attempt to push controlled parking into the area a couple years back. http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,772215,page=46 On this very thread on 24 June, I did warn people: DadOf4 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > using Google translate from Barberspeak to > English: > > "What we agree last night was to fund a study of > the anticipated impacts of closing the road. Once > we have that study we will decide how to proceed. > Clearly something needs to be done which could > range for closing a road to better traffic > calming. But until the study is completed - I > suspect they have all the data already for this > study - we don't know whether a road closure will > be thought practicable. > Lots of research to suggest some traffic > evaporation would occur with a road closure - > likely most would use Lordship Lane as an > alternative. Some Townley." > > Becomes > "I think this is a great idea and it fits > perfectly with my political agenda. However, I > will pretend to be balanced in my opinions so as > not to upset any objectors who could vote for me. > I will gently lobby in favour, but always > maintaining that I am yet undecided. I will > present lots of facts that support the case "for" > and give anecdotal examples of others who are in > favour based on "doorstep conversations" I've had. > But, still I will say that I will only decide once > this has been properly debated & consulted on. I > will then vote in favour of the scheme, > irrespective of any strong local feelings" > > off he goes again

3 now

Somebody just sent me an email on this .....thought I would share here Highly acclaimed film called ?Death of A Gentleman?. Reviews everywhere are summed up as ?If you care about cricket, watch this film?. ED picturehouse may be showing it,but at least 20 people need to sign up for it to go ahead. It would be at 1:30pm on Sunday 27th. Also, at least one of the directors (Jarrod Kimber) has agreed to do a Q&A as part of the event. Anyway, to sign up, go to: https://www.ourscreen.com/screening/39888

Its got a clever indoor washing line - hence the 1.2M price tag

from the introduction of the brown bin system (2/3 years ago ?), it was obvious to me that, at some point, southwark would stop providing the bags. They were only providing them to kick start the concept I drew this conclusion after having to use the ridiculous, convoluted & hidden process on their website to order new bags - that was never going to be sustainable I dont actually mind having to buy them - but it frustrates me that this info was not properly communicated.

Dulwichlad850 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi I'm back firstly I'm not connected to the 4 > boys I'm too young all I said was incident was not > how the op stated she made it sound like she was > on her own when 4 boys boys started abusing her no > that was not the case, out of the 4 boys it was > one boy that was arguing with her son who was > giving it back she told boy to go away he carried > on arguing she then pushed boy away her son was > swearing as well she then put her middle finger up > to boys and told one of them he should go weight > watchers, very adult approach they did not say the > things that was posted yes the boys swore but not > in context that the op said I will not be > commenting anymore on this subject I know what > happened and so does woman in question I'll leave > it there I was the original poster - not my wife. I posted it here in case there was a pattern of behavior developing with these boys (and according to the police, they saw that immediately) But, you're so outraged by this miscarriage of justice that you decided to go and register immediately on the EDF. You appear a couple of times, casting doubt on the incident and then say that you wont be commenting any more.....hmm So, I think you should take your comments to the police. An incident allegedly happened which, according to you, was a distortion/fabrication. If it did happen like that, I think you owe it to the boys concerned to go and make a statement in their defence (they didnt get arrested, but their details were taken and logged i Guess). You also say that my wife assaulted a young boy - again, pretty serious stuff that you should take to the police If you PM me, I'll happily provide you the crime reference number

Dulwichlad850 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > hi, > i was at the park when this incodent took place > and i do not think the lady in question is telling > the whole truth, > it was her Son that started this little episode > and the lady in question also pushed one of the > boys with some force while letting her son call > the kids Fing mugs etc. Pretty sure that you must have seen a separate incident (or you must be a pre-programmed troll) My wife was walking with our terrified/crying 8 year old and a very scared 11 year old when it happened. But of course, she may have just turned out not to be the woman I've been married to for 15 years, who is a tecaher and has just decided to get into a verbal scrap with some 11 years olds for fun, then pushed them around and gone on to fabricate a story to the police .....because she had nothing better to do. I have to say if I had been there, they may well have been called fing mugs. In terms of descriptions - I'm with others on that - dont think its that appropriate - the police have dealt with this now

thanks for the kind words Yes, she did stand up to them - shes not the sort to just look at her feet and walk away - but was also pretty scared by the level of aggression and tirade of abuse. "what are you f***king looking at, I'm going to rip those sunglasses off your f**ing face you bi***" Also worth noting that there were plenty of people around apparently and nobody thought to walk over and see what was going on or ask her if she was OK. I like to think its because they were so young nobody actually thought they could possibly be threatening her Anyway, the cops turned up to our house after she called 101. They went and found the kids (who turned out to be 12), who of course denied it all, but were interestingly in the process of doing the same to somebody else at the time apparently. The cops took their details and gave them a metaphorical clip round the ear and told them it was time to go home. I think that's a reasonable outcome and it was great to see the police taking things like this seriously.

Mrs Dadof4 just got back from Dulwich park pretty upset. Group of 4 kids (10-11 year olds) being really aggressive, following her, coming out with vocal masterpieces such as "why don't you go and suck some c***, you f**** w*ore" shes called it in to 101, but mainly posting here so others are aware. If anybody else has had a similar experience today , would encourage you also to call it in I think what shocked her most was the age of these kids

much better thinking on this post over the last few days. The interesting story here isn't about the redevelopment of a small plot in SE London, its about an organisation that is acting in breach of its initial charter and how locals are campaigning to have their archaic powers removed. Thats just the sort of pressure needed.

I've only loosely followed this thread so excuse any gross oversights in my post. First, I agree, this development looks like a nightmare and doesn't fit the "conservation" remit in any way. However, I think its verging in naive to think that the LA planners were going to reject it. London is desperate for housing and developers all have lots of experience in pushing the planning limits to their acceptable boundary. So, if they don't see any clear breaches, theyre going to accept it. A much greater chance of stopping this would be by applying pressure to Duliwch estate themselves: these are the people who are trusted to maintain the heritage of the area and these are the people who are driving this through. This organisation are a law unto themselves, so I dont think there is any "official" route, however they are used to their very comfortable world of collecting money and giving it to 3 of the richest schools in the country (http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,1396133,page=1) - and then having the cheek to say that their conversation/preservation work is unrelated. Its clearly not. There is clearly a conflict of interest here between the two. Make their comfortable life a little less uncomfortable

has anybody got any updates on the re-development of the C&G ? It seems to have been closed for ages (10 months from reading this old thread) and my Friday summer evening dog walks are just not the same

James why is the process for ordering more food waste bags from the council so poor. I have to hunt around on the website and end up filling in a generic enquiry form. My guess is that southwark hope to "transition" people into buying their own bags. If so, they should be clear about that. In the meantime, whislt they still maintain that they provide them, can this process not be refined as it wastes a lot of everybodys time im sure

for a pedestrian - that is a SHOCKING junction - very dangerous

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi Dadof4, > Entertaining and wrong. but you have got form for this: you did it for 4 months over the controlled parking

using Google translate from Barberspeak to English: "What we agree last night was to fund a study of the anticipated impacts of closing the road. Once we have that study we will decide how to proceed. Clearly something needs to be done which could range for closing a road to better traffic calming. But until the study is completed - I suspect they have all the data already for this study - we don't know whether a road closure will be thought practicable. Lots of research to suggest some traffic evaporation would occur with a road closure - likely most would use Lordship Lane as an alternative. Some Townley." Becomes "I think this is a great idea and it fits perfectly with my political agenda. However, I will pretend to be balanced in my opinions so as not to upset any objectors who could vote for me. I will gently lobby in favour, but always maintaining that I am yet undecided. I will present lots of facts that support the case "for" and give anecdotal examples of others who are in favour based on "doorstep conversations" I've had. But, still I will say that I will only decide once this has been properly debated & consulted on. I will then vote in favour of the scheme, irrespective of any strong local feelings" off he goes again

this thread has the potential to be the best ever EDF thread - its got it all planning,southwark, casual racism, attitudes to tax, society, property prices,crime - guaranteed to all come up

These tabletops are deliberately designed to b ambiguous IMO. The logic is that that ambiguity causes everybody to slow down. I do think they work pretty well for cars & other vehicles - but they can be dangerous in the situations like the op outlines above. I've had a similar thing (at different junctions) happen a couple of times - one ended up with me on the floor

We had to do this a couple of years ago. On the left hand side, we went round spoke to our neighbours, made some amendments and got it signed in 7 days On the right hand side - it took us 9 months to get it agreed (Southwark council) sorry- cant remember the dept or names,etc

No a package, but booking.com allows you to specify both the number of people AND the number of rooms. In your case put 2+2 otherwise try airbnb.com ownersdirect.co.uk

no - I checked with Southwark. Council tax bills have nothing to do with the electoral role - there is no cross reference there. It is a non-validated name, Southwark just use the assumption that,if somebody with that name is prepared to pay for it, they must be there. Thats why there is an obligation to tell them when you move (and who has moved in after you) I fully agree that they have to be certain - just think theyre not actually doing that. I'm all up for them weeding out the "cheats". But, from experience, you must build up a set of documentary evidence that somebody lives where they do. Thats why orgs usually ask for multiple pieces of evidence. I think charter feel that theyve got a magic ticket here (and its easy to administer) - but they havent

landsberger "Frankly going to such lengths to get a school place is utterly pathetic." - agreed bornagain - I understand all of those potential scams. I'm sure they happen. But if you read my earlier posts you will see that what Charter ask for can not prevent any of those siuations happening........ child benefit will happily put any address on the letter that they are asked to southwark council will happily put any name on the bill; from their perpestive, as long as the bill is paid, then they consider that person must be there

Sillywoman > To be fair the Charter did send a letter nearly > three weeks ago now, with very specific details of > what they needed and contact numbers for CHB & > council if you needed them. Yes and I, like lots and lots of people I've spoken over the last couple days to made the assumption that when it said "in the same name" - that they sort of meant the same family name. Obviously, bad assumption. I guess, like me, those people combined some logic (what could they possibly expect to achieve by them being in one parents name when they have a birth cert) with the fact that no other school asks for this information in EXACTLY this way - to conclude that surely our docs were OK Yes, yes - should have noticed it. Yes,yes should have phoned to check. Yes, yes, their system is clearly flawed otherwise so many people wouldn't be in the sae boat