BrandNewGuy

On October 17th James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > have asked for 4-16 Melbourne Grove wobbly paving > to be relaid again at Conways expense. Stunned > that only fully renewed 3-4 years ago. James, despite your prompt action and the paving being apparently repaired, the problems have cropped up again. On the short stretch from Callows to the upholstery shop, there are now at least seven loose slabs, three of which are tripping hazards. Sorry to sound like a stuck record, but I think the contractor needs to know that they should to do the job properly. Many thanks.

Beer from East Dulwich too - the lovely Clarkshaws http://www.clarkshaws.co.uk/

fl0wer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > > Urban planners are increasingly expected now to > show awareness of biodiversity. > Adequate research into trees' friendliness to > wildlife is crucial, for townscapes to remain > healthy and vibrant for a broad range of species. > Here in the UK it means that Councils mustn't make > arrangements with industrial-scale horticultural > tree nurseries who often supply street > 'Ornamentals' which support only one or two > 'pests'. > It means we must insist on consultation and > collaboration with organisations whose extra > knowledge, eg of birds and invertebrates can help > local Tree Officers. > > http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jan/06 > /us-cities-urban-wildlife#comment-30572080 Hear, hear. I'll be watching Southwark's - and the Wildlife Trust's - response with interest.

Oy, go and join the other 570 pages on that thread. I thought the point of that game was not to repeat a previous answer. Does anyone check? Or is it like being caught in some hideous Pop Quiz / Never Mind The Buzzcocks perpetually repeating loop?

MarkE Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > As for Platform 13 being relieved by Platforms > 14-16, apparently once these become available, 12 > and 13 will be shut, so the relief won't be that > significant. Possibly not, but the platforms will be wider, which should reduce the crush problem considerably.

It was actually "Something For Me", by Ocean Colour Scene, but I can't be arsed to find the year.

Convex Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > i would send feedback but i don't see it improving > until the new platforms are all up and running. Platforms 14-16 are due to reopen 'in Spring 2014', so not too long to wait thankfully if that schedule is to be believed.

Every day: "Can someone Google something for me cos I can't be arsed?"

"Professor Daniel Miller of University College London, one of the researchers working on the project, said in a blog post: ?Mostly they feel embarrassed even to be associated with it. ?This year marked the start of what looks likely to be a sustained decline of what had been the most pervasive of all social networking sites. Young people are turning away in their droves and adopting other social networks instead, while the worst people of all, their parents, continue to use the service."" Good. I find Facebook a very useful way of keeping in touch with friends. The last thing I want is a bunch of teenagers getting hysterical, suicidal or just plain dumb all over my feed. I say let 'em bugger off.

LadyDeliah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > BrandNewGuy Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Do you think teachers > > who support the BNP should be sacked? > > > If it's reflected in the things they are teaching > the kids, then yes. Agreed, but what if it isn't?

I'm not nitpicking. Spouting that stuff on social media might well be a sackable offence. Being an ignorant racist isn't. You might find the difference trivial, but I'd rather avoid the prospect of witch-hunting. Do you think teachers who support the BNP should be sacked?

Neither do I, but an 'ignorant racist cow' could be someone who said non-threateningly, in the course of a conversation, "Actually, I do believe that some races are superior to others." If there was no evidence that the belief directly affected her work or her relations to others, should she be sacked? This is why I was very uncomfortable with the "sack BNP members" thing a few years ago, repulsive though I think the BNP's politics are.

Agreed. I was just suggesting that being an 'ignorant racist cow' is not in itself a sackable offence.

But she should be judged for what she does not who she 'is'. If someone is an 'ignorant racist cow' should she be sacked regardless of what she says or does?

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > NewWave Wrote: > > > If you can't stand the heat, keep out of the > > > kitchen :)) > > > > > > Sorry Sue, but that sounds really bitchy. > > > xxxxxxxx > > Dear oh dear, it was supposed to be a joke, hence > the smiley :( Don't worry, Sue - NewWave's passive-aggressive post is a classic of the genre: 1. Post opinion 2. Read someone's reply disagreeing 3. Make 'ad hominrm' comment to person replying, possibly including the word 'bullying', though 'bitchy' will do (references to Daily Mail, The Guardian and MumsNet are optional) 4. Approve of 'healthy debate' and being 'friendly' - code for 'agree with me or stage 3 might be repeated'

mrure Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What a negative attitude many people have. Very > Daily Mail. OK, so this thread has had eight people 'in favour' of a new charity shop, three 'against' and eleven neither for nor against in an obvious way or simply pointing out matters of fact. How is this 'very Daily Mail'? Or is that phrase just an updated 'talk to the hand' lazy thread-stopper?

fl0wer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Here in ED we get an extra din of Heathrow plane > noise from Friday through to Sunday. Most probably > from budget companies like Easyjet. Budget airlines don't use Heathrow.

edcam Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > nxjen Wrote: > > I'm shocked at such an uncharitable attitude. > > Thankfully any petition would have little > chance > > of success. Who would it be addressed to? > > I'm shocked that people think it's a good idea to > dilute the stock of the charity shops that are > already there, whose trade would suffer as a > result of yet another shop arriving. But that > clearly doesn't bother you. I'm shocked that no-one has mentioned that, traditionally, similar shops often concentrate together (think South Molton St for fashion, Hatton Garden for diamonds, Rye Lane for chicken bits and phone unlocking...). Bringing people into such an area increases footfall for all. I know that charity shop fans have similar 'hotspots'.

I remember 12.34pm on 5/6/78. Had a pint of mild in The Brook pub, Selly Oak, Birmingham. Really. It was a Monday. Priceless memories...

LOL - brilliant!

Yeah, the 08.40 has a tendency to either leave at 08.38-something or not arrive at all.

The usual, I suspect - br*wn envelopes stuffed with c*sh... ;-)

Tens of thousands of people using the existing straightforward urban rail infrastructure could well be the greenest commuting option, so it's unwise to employ 'greener than thou' arguments for cycling to work.

Yes he did. I had the pleasure of going to his 80th birthday party - 12 years ago. A great man.

Takeaways are different - you get served pronto when you're at the front of the queue. Queueing at events can be a pain, though. I remember our two lads making a few quid for themselves at a festival the other year by offering to queue for people at the Pieminister stall.