DulvilleRes

Well yes of course but do you have any evidence that that is the case or is that just a hunch/wild guess/desperate wish? And you have to be very careful as I think your starting to drag yourself into potentially troublesome defamation territory Bravo, as you would say! You have actually answered a question. While you are on a roll, why not answer the questions you have been asked for at least a couple of years? Who are the dominant decision makers in One Dulwich? Are they actively involved in any political grouping - Reform, The Conservatives, or the group that stood on an anti-LTN ticket in the last election? I feel it is unlikely to be Labour. Lib Dems pre pre-election material has started landing, and it makes no reference so far to traffic issues. Reform has committed to rip out the LTN's, and certainly some of the denigrating of experts and disregard for evidence-based facts that have come from some of the anti-LTNers on these threads would have a lot in common with the Reform playbook. Local Conservatives campaigned in the last election virtually solely on local traffic issues. It would be interesting to see how they will come out in the coming months ahead of the May 2026 elections. Is One Dulwich a one-man band, as some posters have suggested? Or is it none of the above? One Dulwich is an expensive operation to run - an extensive website, all those placards - where does the money come from? You claim you are all about accountability; One Dulwich just before the last local election had a section on their website 'Choose a good councillor', which is quite a politicised step for an organisation that on its website claims to be a broad political church, or even politically agnostic. Rarely a topic from One Dulwich's cheerleaders on these threads goes by without criticising the council and councillors to a degree that feels at times obsessive, yet when it comes to any requests for transparency on their part? Arctic silence. Whatever the truth might be, do you not agree that it is in the public interest to know who is purporting to represent the community, and how it is paid for? In the past you have claimed you have absolutely no idea who runs or funds One Dulwich. It could be true; I find it implausible. Is that still your position? You have extensive knowledge of the minutiae of local politics which suggests strong political engagement. You post One Dulwich press releases, and you are proud that One Dulwich reflects your 'research'. How does that research come to them? If you really don't know and have no interest in finding out who they are, how are we remotely to take seriously your pronouncements on accountability? Defamation? Unless you are attempting to attach a menacing tone to your characteristic blustering, you are clearly not a lawyer.

Given that past critics of the anti LTN lobby have been physically targeted by a person/ persons unknown, I am not in a hurry to share my details. For avoidance of doubt, this targeting is a matter of Police record. It is more than possible that anyone involved or condoning in such acts has nothing to do with One Dulwich, I would hope this to be the case. However, the whole of the One Dulwich operation is shrouded in a degree of opaqueness that does not fill me with full confidence. If they were a properly set up, constituted and accountable organisation, which I think anyone who purports to represent the community at scale should be, it would be a different story. But for me there is just too much that is unknown about them, and having seen first hand the disgusting public behaviour of some who are vexed at traffic issues (are they involved in One Dulwich - who knows?), I am un-inclined to put my head up. Apart from any physical risk, the naming and pillorying on these threads of individuals, especially people who don't even set themselves up as politicians, by anonymous One Dulwich cheerleaders has been depressing, and reflective of the general degradation of how politics is conducted. Another question for you - if it were found that One Dulwich was fundamentally run and funded by political activists whose main aim is to get a particular electoral result in the local elections, do you think that put those individuals at risk of breaking electoral law, both in terms of electoral spend and transparency of campaigning?

Then answer the simple question - who runs One Dulwich and who funds them?

..... and yet you consistently peddle misleading and unbalanced narratives that are virtually wholly aligned to the people you say you have no links to. And you post their press releases. I think people will make their own minds up on this one.

This granular knowledge of the intricate ins and outs of various sub committees suggests a deep engagement in local politics, which does run counter to the 'I'm just a citizen Joe/ Joanna' routine of some of these anti LTN posters. In my opinion makes them look more like highly politicised campaigners. This would be of a piece of that famous Dulwich Society meeting, where a senior local Conservative stood up and accused some of her colleagues of using underhand tactics when it came to local issues. I have no issue on anyone campaigning on what they want within the law, but it is the opaque nature, as well as the at times sheer nastiness, of much of the anti LTN campaigning that troubles me. And for people with such granular knowledge of local politics - why not just answer the questions, who runs One Dulwich and who funds them?

And I've got 74,214 emails expressing support for Dulwich Square - it must be true, because I say so. Re Dulwich Society transport sub committee, all I know is that I was at a large Dulwich Society public meeting where someone who clearly wanted to remain anonymous had their name shouted out, despite her wishes, by a contingent of people with the patina of grim school bullies. I wouldn't blame her for wanting to remain anonymous - there has been a pattern of physical targeting of people who might have a different view to the anti - LTN lobby, so serious that the Police have had to be involved. No such threat has ever existed going the other way. In this context I would think twice about taking on a role in an open and properly run organisation such as Dulwich Society, where everyone is a volunteer. That itself I find deeply disturbing. Can 'open and properly run' be said for One Dulwich? Does anyone have any clue as to where it's extensive funding comes from?

None at all, apart from just being a regular member of Dulwich Society with zero active role, now or at any time in the past. I do like the newsletters though. I have noted you seem to be getting me confused with someone else, and what I have found again disturbing is the propensity for the anti - LTN lobby to 'out' people, especially those who aren't politicians, and also especially women. It does feel all of a piece with the general degradation of public discourse - the denigrating of experts and the making stuff up - which has been driven predominately by the new right. One Dulwich 1600 emails - says who? That'll be One Dulwich, so it must be true. Even if it were, the basic question is still being avoided by all involved - who runs them and who funds them?

You are a huge loss to One Dulwich, as the longstanding pattern of your posting would suggest near-perfect alignment. As for One Dulwich being 'community led' - where is the evidence of that? We only have their word for it. Perhaps you could employ your citizen journalist skills in finding out for us. I think your persistent silence on this question, and also where their extensive funding comes from, speaks volumes. You are happy to continually post their press releases, but have zero interest in what their provenance is. It doesn't stack up. What I do know as fact is local right-leaning politicians used to head up the various local anti LTN groups that seemingly evaporated before the appearance of One Dulwich, and then those politicians mysteriously disappeared, only to surface now and then, asking the Council formal questions which largely mirrored whatever One Dulwich's latest concerns were. Could it be these Undead are driving the anti LTN campaign? People have a right to campaign on what they want within the law, but what I find disturbing is there have been a number of clues that local democracy isn't being conducted transparently.

Difference here is I don't claim to represent the community, which One Dulwich repeatedly does. So in terms of local democracy, that goes in my book with different obligations and responsibilities. It is so simple, why can't any of the One Dulwich cheerleaders on these threads answer the simple question - who runs One Dulwich and who funds them? This is a question they either refuse or can't be bothered to ask, which doesn't inspire a great deal of confidence in their various forays into 'citizen journalism'. For all the brave talk from the anti LTN posters on these threads of holding our local official representatives to account as they are attempting to do on this particular discussion, when it comes to causes close to their heart, different standards apply. All of which makes me feel that what lies behind so much of this unrelenting criticism of the council and the individuals involved in them isn't so much neighbourly debate, but more a disingenuous campaign.

If it is about trying to determine the truth of what lies behind an unrelenting anti-council agenda, it is everything to do with the thread. To try and suggest otherwise looks like a desperate attempt to deflect. Nil points, as they say.

Given that you are all about accountability, why have you no in interest in who funds and runs the shadowy and opaque One Dulwich? Until recently you were regularly posting One Dulwich press releases on this local discussion forum, and at times your research has preempted them. Your views and concerns are so aligned you should consider renaming yourself Dulwich Uno in tribute. But with you and your extensive knowledge of he minutiae of local politics, it is all about attacking the council. The best that could be said is that you have a very unbalanced view of local concerns, and anyone reading your utterances could be forgiven for suspecting that there is an agenda you are not sharing.

I've never been convinced by your 'power to the people - I'm just a citizen journalist' stance. You have a deep knowledge of local politics and an unremitting anti-council agenda that looks to me like political intent disguised as something else. Are you sure you don't know who funds and runs the local anti-LTN campaign, as you claim?

Indeed best of luck Maria. You run a fabulous restaurant, a completely unique spot. It is like stepping off the street and into Spain any time of the year. The booze is brilliantly curated, and the food is always great.

Looking at your track record - spreading alarmist misinformation about crime, being dismissive of experts, a complete lack of interest in how organisations aligned to your views are funded - it has a fair bit in common with the Reform playbook, whether you vote for them or not.

Thanks Earl and others for the diligent work in debunking the 'LTN causes crime wave' fictitious nonsense that Rockets tried to float. I think it diminishes the chances that this dangerous rubbish ends up on a One Dulwich press release ( where some of Rocket's past unchecked utterances on these threads have landed) and then most likely would migrate to a party political election leaflet next spring.

I've no issues with any one being held to account for their actions, and that includes you. The constant stream of factual inaccuracy and misleading statements from you which keep having to be fact checked and corrected is exhausting. These threads should be for genuine debate amongst neighbours, not having to deal with an endless culture war tropes and misinformation. It really makes me question the motivation of what lies behind it. There comes a point where such a blind disregard for facts and any kind of balanced debate tips into trolling.

Depressingly familiar pattern of posting here by the anti-LTN lobby - make an alarmist and totally unsubstantiated claim, argue endlessly against all the overwhelming evidence that shows the claim to be false, and hope that some of it sticks. Is there some kind of agenda we're not being told about? Local elections coming up?

Maybe Rockets saw a poltergeist PCSO. It wouldn't be the first supernatural event associated with the Square - a few years back about 200 people turned up to an anti-LTN demo, but the anti-LTN lobby claimed they saw a further 800 people there.

The fact checking of Rockets and fellow travellers in recent months has been a delight to behold. Once they ran rampant on these threads, as if it were their very own public ( dis) information channel laden with the kind of fact free assertions and personal jibes we've all come to expect in this era of degraded politics. Now they are held accountable. Fair play to Earl and others.

Half baked conspiracy theories about a cabal of lycra clad cyclists thwarting the Great British Motorist's right to drive, an often fact free and unrelenting attack on anything the lefty council does, and now stoking up fears of an imagined crime wave - anyone would think it is Reform posting on these threads.

A friend of mine had their phone snatched recently on East Dulwich Grove, which rather questions the thesis that roads within an LTN have led to some kind of crime epidemic.

... and all of this in a context where despite posting One Dulwich press releases and having concerns that are near indentically alligned to them, Rockets states he has no idea who is behind them or who funds them. Is this ignorance either an indicator of an incredibly one sided approach to local issues which doesn't lend itself to any genuine balanced debate, or perhaps a bad faith approach to engaging on these threads?

There is strong evidence that local Conservatives are still hoping that 'traffic issues' will be the key to success in the May 2026 local elections. Leading local Conservatives regularly surface formally asking questions of Southwark that mirror the latest One Dulwich talking points. These same Conservatives used to head up the anti-LTN campaigning groups that were the foreunners to One Dulwich, and then mysteriously disappeared. There is a real opaqueness here as to how local politics is being conducted. Things got particularly murky when some of these figures appeared to try and take control of the Dulwich Society, and in a heated AGM, a leading local Conservative ( former mayor of Lambeth) accused her colleagues of 'using underhand tactics' in local issues. I sometimes wonder if this thread is for some of the more vociferous posters just one big campaigning stunt.

The strand is actually very helpful in exposing what appears to be elements of the Rockets modus operandi. Put out some half-baked and misleading statement, and hope it sticks. It actually feels quite Trumpian, with elements of troll mixed in. Fair pay to Earl, with his diligent chasing down of the truth, in calling it out as the nonsense that it is.

Just to put some balance into this assessment/ reader added context Some elements of the anti LTN lobby have been so unpleasant on occasion with physical harassment of those who oppose their views that the Police have had to be involved. Fold into this the constant naming and hectoring of individuals way beyond proportionality or civilised debate on these threads by the anonymous anti - LTN posters that I think the net effect is to create a hostile atmosphere for people trying to engage in local issues and local democracy. This is all in the context of serious unanswered questions remaining about the provenance of One Dulwich, the organisation which purports to 'represent' the community on some of these traffic issues.