Huguenot

Hurrah for that!

Quite right HAL9000, but I think this is a study in Lancashire and Hull that demonstrates the benefits of the replacement on a wholesale level from which the results will be revealed tomorrow. Hence the article. It's quite possible that plenty more people will also say 'yeah whatever', but it's always nice to see someone actually doing a bit of work and calculating a reasonable cost/benefit argument. :-)

I agree that children need something better, but I'm not sure how narrow the 'incompetence of the adults that provide it' should be defined. It is not my belief that the challenges in state education can be laid at the feet of the teaching profession or the national curriculum. I think the British have reached a crisis of culture where meritocratic values of education, of self advancement, of hard work and application have been replaced by a simmering resentment that someone else is to blame for whatever perceived grievance we've generated this time. We think politicians are liars, GPs are scoundrels, lawyers are liars, journalists are muckrakers, priests are paedophiles and accountants are cheats. Most of all we think teachers are lazy, stupid and incompotent. We blame them because they can't control parents' bad driving. We come out with proverbs like 'those who can do, those who can't, teach'. We abuse them, teach our kids to abuse them. We push burgers through fences when schools try and improve our children's diets. The only thing we admire is a pointless ten minutes of TV celebrity. This means that we're teaching our kids that school is worthless and academic success has no value. If we want to improve our education facilities we need to change our entire cultural ambition. I don't imagine this is going to happen without several decades and a major catastrophe. In the short term I'm really glad that massive TV shows of the 21st century also include those like Numb3rs, CSI and House that celebrate academic success.

Wow... "Medical organisations want licensed premises to use tumblers made of a shatter-proof plastic called polycarbonate glassware. Trials in Hull and Lancashire have shown the switch reduces the number of serious facial and neck injuries, that can sometimes be fatal. The A&E doctors, together with the Royal College of Surgeons of England and the British Medical Association, support the change. A glass is the most common weapon in fights in pubs and bars. Football grounds were banned from selling alcohol in glass containers some years ago. Since the introduction of the trial in Hull in 2008, nobody has been injured because of "glassing" and the local NHS has saved ?7.2m in eye surgery costs." Guardian 23rd Sept 2010 Hull is UKs 17th largest city with about 250,000 residents. There are 15m residents in cities of that size or larger in the UK. If we assumed as a starter that the 'glassing' problem was limited to cities that big or larger, then at least ?450m could be saved out of the tax payers annual bill by changing from glass to pollys in big cities. That's more than could be saved by firing NHS execs with big pay cheques. I wonder if the British people would be willing to make that sacrifice in order to save so much of their own money?

I think you'd have to agree that elevating England to heavenly status - the ultimate achievement - is indeed someway superior? I think if you start asserting that you have a 'special relationship' with God as a nation that your neighbours are going to consider that a wee bit self-aggrandising. That is, after all, the reason why you get goosebumps when you sing it. These responses are becoming a little bit obtuse Magpie, you seem to be deliberately not see obvious connections and metaphors.

Well we'll just have to differ. For me, bullying is taking advantage of a real or perceived imbalance of power. To assert that you have an 'overwhelming majority' is to establish an imbalance of power in the minds of those people who disagreed with you. In fact it stops people disagreeing with you, because people may not want to put themselves in what is perceived to be a weak minority. You are quite right that it was indeed a statement of fact, just like 'I'm bigger than you' is a statement of fact. In a particular context both of them are bullying. To ask people to provide evidence to support their assertions is not bullying. It might be excessively direct, or challenging, or slightly autistic in its lack of social niceties, but the one thing it isn't is bullying.

Crikey, each time I answer your complaint you move the goal posts? So now you want to know where the bullying assertion came from. It was this comment: "It seems that the overwhelming majority of the people who contributed were against the installation of the lights" A comment like that isn't designed to win the argument by validity, it's to try and win the argument by weight of numbers. This is defacto bullying. You may prefer not to use the word bully, but the phrase is designed to pressurise your opponents psychologically instead of rationally by making you part of a 'bigger gang'. Many people do it out of habit, and even think it's reasonable. I just don't happen to agree. PS I might have used a softer phrase if you hadn't started throwing mud at me with 'inane drivel', so really, you reap what you sow.

"so your entire attack on me in this regard is incorrect" I think my entire attack on you in this regard was limited to 'it's a wee bit preseumptive' until you started asserting that I was talking 'inane drivel'. At that point I said you were attention seeking. I think suggesting that you were attention seeking in response to being accused of 'inane drivel' is not an unreasonable response, and it was you that threw the first abuse after all ;-) Sure, I recognise that it was Marmora Man describing your request, but that mistake really pales into insignificance when compared with your absurd over-reaction.

Vickster, the request on 'Ask Admin' was specifically this: "A request from Vickster Vickster Request and the thread Vickster would like locked at top of East Dulwich Issues" 'At the top of...' is about as clear as you can get. Locked at the top is a sticky. Penguin68 you may well be right, but I wasn't talking about the lights, I was talking about the flawed arguments and tactics that were being employed. Living abroad, whilst it might make me and apparently everyone else abroad 'tit's, hasn't relieved me of the ability to recognise when people are running campaigns to change public facilities based on gut feel, personal prejudice and self-interest. I'm not saying that to be rude, and it's not an attack. In the absence of any data that was just what was taking place.

"You were comparing Anglican hymns about spiritual renewal with Nazism - so it meets your definition of Godwin's law." I was doing nothing of the sort. I was talking about the use of Anglican hymns to inspire war, and that religion was used often dishonestly to inspire war. The recent misrepresentation of the Nazis as atheists by the pope on his vist was a good, relevant and timely example.

Thanks for your advice *Bob*. If you read back you'll find that I don't have a view on this specific set of lights, my views were on the arguments being used to call for it's reduction: That the views of a majority of posters was being misrepresented as a majority of users That the needs of car drivers were being elevated beyond pedestrians That claims of rat runs were anecdotal That claims of speeding were unsubstantiated That efforts for serious investigation by the council were being rubbished before they could be reviewed That posters were claiming to speak on behalf of an unidentified 'other' majority That the views of people for whom the lights were very useful were being dismissed without reference That proponents of the decommission of the lights were a little bit presumptuous in asking for the thread to be locked to the top of the board The lights may well be useless, I don't have a view. I don't believe I need to have seen the lights to recognise that these arguments are flawed. If it acts as a spur for people to get the right data and make informed choices then my contribution may have been useful. However, for people who want the lights gone because it suits them regardless, I'm sure i will remain a 'tit'. PS Love the argument that as a 'foreigner' I'm not entitled to an opinion, what other unpleasantness is hidden behind your veneer of bonhomie?

Well I guess 'tit' was an insult, so does the juxtaposition with 'ex-pat' make that an insult too? It seems a little harsh to be so rude to everybody who lives outside of the UK just because you don't like my views on arguments to remove a pedestrian crossing? Or perhaps you just lost your temper slightly. I fear it says more about you than me. It seems to diminish you slightly.

If there were a pile of fag butts outside my house, I'd be asking quite serious questions about why smokers are hanging around my house all day and whether they represent a threat. ;-) I think fag butts on the ground are horrible. Not only that, but I think it's a bit like broken window syndrome - where the discarded fag butts presage a wider disinterest and respect for our society.

I think you're being too literal with your interpretation. If the author had not deliberately intended to create military associations he would have written "Onward Christian Children" or some such. The next line is "marching as to war", which cannot be confused with "strolling to the petting zoo". The fact is that these songs celebrate the link between religion and militarism, and it is daft not to think about religious marching militarism without thinking about the crusades. The associations are clear as daylight, and to celebrate these songs is to celebrate oppression and jingoism.

Well there you go *Bob*, seems your four year old hasn't done her research. I wouldn't be too harsh on her, just maybe 60mins on John Locke and Empiricism, with some follow up sessions on the importance of both reason and data from the works of Descartes, Liebniz and Spinoza?

If only you'd been there to advise Churchill on how wrong he was. You don't seem to be too familiar with Godwin's Law, but it refers to a reductionist argument or comparison, not a reference. The interesting thing about the Holy Roman Empire is that it most definitely was a religious empire. When Henry IV attempted to go all secular on the pope's ass in 1075, he was excommunicated and lost complete political control. Hence the pope was effectively the Emporer, not whichever misfortunate actually carried the title. It's plausible that when this pope, with his German background, comes to the UK to lambast the secular nature of the state it's reasonable to assume that he's not berating us for a lack of moral fibre, but in fact cursing the UK's secession from his Empire. Catholicism is not just a religion, it's a tyrannical government in exile. It has a naked ambition to usurp the state and the nerve to turn up on our doorstep to tell us so. The issues of dogma seem rather trivial by comparison.

:)) Nah, I don't believe you. You'd get bored without someone offering a counter viewpoint to keep you on your toes. Although I must say itatm, your pursuit of me from thread to thread slagging me off makes me think that my quiet conviction that you're a person who holds a misplaced grievance and engages in vendetta was absolutely spot on. You gonna do for me like you did for KCH - concerted smear campaign?

What, and you think Onward Christian Soldiers is not about a religious crusade. Why do you think the Salvation Army chose it? You think Jersualem is not a jingoist anthemn nominating England as the birthplace of a counter industrial religious war? These are all songs that justify righteous religious violence through metaphor. It's not just me that thinks so either, here's Winston Churchill on the powerful influence of Onward Christian Soldiers: We sang "Onward, Christian Soldiers" indeed, and I felt that this was no vain presumption, but that we had the right to feel that we serving a cause for the sake of which a trumpet has sounded from on high. When I looked upon that densely packed congregation of fighting men of the same language, of the same faith, of the same fundamental laws, of the same ideals ... it swept across me that here was the only hope, but also the sure hope, of saving the world from measureless degradation. Righteous violence with religion at it's core. The Nazis were incorrectly asserted by popular myth to be godless heathens, occultists, or as the pope put it, atheists. Hence the religious conquest of the Third Reich was part of the overall motivation for war. Ironically, amongst many of his ambitions, Adolf was trying to recreate the Holy Roman Empire. How do you think he managed to engage his troops in the holocaust? I assure you it wasn't a war on noses.

Possibly DGKQ, although community groups here don't lobby externally because they're looking in not out. There's effectively nothing to lobby for, because there's no government investment to be redirected. The political influence it wields is inside the community. Community leaders exert a very strong influence on the people in a way that we as Brits might find a bit suspect. Favours and benefits in kind etc.

Well crikey Magpie, if you like singing songs about the crusades and England, England uber alles can I not be forgiven for interpreting that as being into a bit of oppression and jack boots? I can see what you mean about the theatrical quality of the church, but unlike you I can't disassociate myself with the heinous cimes and meanness of spirit that were needed to achieve it.

DM your entire online persona is set up to get a reaction to sterotyping and ridiculing young urban mothers by portraying yourself as self-centred, insincere and spoilt. You can hardly blame anyone else if you do it so effectively that you raise a disparaging remark. These aren't 'clever words' and they're not bullying, they're just the reality. If you don't get freebies through your blog and then write about them I'll eat my hat. If you state categorically that this has never taken place and you intend never to let it take place then I shall humbly apologise. If it has, then your 'complaint' is somewhat duplicitous. :-S

"I have not felt the need to attack those with views that the lights should stay" I think Vickster that if you check back again you'll discover that you only got a broadside from me when you suggested my opinion and my mickey take of MM's letter was 'inane drivel' So come on tiger, really you were happy to dish it out but didn't like it when your insult got short shrift. I celebrate anyone, in this case the local council, that give pedestrians a priority over motorists when considering these schemes. That's a default position for me. If you think people are speeding down your road, then the local police support team will be willing to stand on your road and use the speed gun. If it tells you they're not speeding then you just need to forget about it. I've no doubt that the amount of traffic using these roads will have marginally increased. The question is the degree to which this has happened, and whether this is worth sacrficing the needs of young families, pensioners and schoolchildren to rectify. My guess is no. You can always test it of course, by 'suspending' the crossing for one month. Do traffic counts at the beginning and end of the study.

Online Risk If I can find a multiplayer version I'll take you on :)

Apparently London's in for a big one.... "In April 1580, a magnitude 5.5 earthquake caused extensive damage in the south-east of England and north-east of France. In London, two people were killed. The epicentre of the quake was in the Dover Straits 86 miles from London, originating 10-20 miles underground. "This earthquake can certainly happen again because even the quake in 1580 was a repeat of a previous one that occurred in 1382, with almost the same epicentre, size and results," said Roger Musson of the British Geological Survey."

Our marvellous industry darling. I'm firmly of the mind that the blogging and social media industry should be in the hands of PR folk rather than advertising or digital folk - they come at it with a hammer and end up with results (possibly like this one) that are so unsubtle it's like gettting lemon juice in your eye. I just wish the PR folk would smell the coffee and get some digital training - it's really not difficult. Anyway, your post made be look up the TF target market. To which the man appears to have answered... "Who?s your target customer? I am. I like to design for me as I am, me if I was 60, me if I was 25, me if I were thin, blond, six foot tall and 25; everything runs through a filter of ?Would I wear that if I were that person? Our real target is men in their 30s and 40s, urban customers" Except that to know a man, know his diet... "he lays off the man jizz and eats his vegetables when he?s feeling fat" I reckon that sounds like a firmly held EDF audience? No? :D Maybe I found another bloke with the same name?