rendelharris

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > We have become obsessed with P.C. there used to > be a road sign .. 'Accident Black Spot. > > I believe it is now banned.. > > DulwichFox Urban myth Fox, they were either removed when safety measures (traffic calming, safety cameras etc) lowered the accident rate or were replaced with the generally agreed to be more effective "18 fatalities on this road since 1999" or similar signs. They were never banned and nothing to do with any political correctness - the term "accident blackspot" is still in current use and I've never seen anyone suggest it shouldn't be. It's like the old story that the GLC banned people from asking for "black coffee" in County Hall - just didn't happen.

It's interesting the way some on here have dismissed this hazard (and from what several posters have said, it clearly is a hazard) as one which should be taken care of by residents (not sure where that leaves (ahem) long stretches alongside parks, commons etc) or which can be easily avoided with care. I wonder how happy they'd be if we get snow and the council doesn't send out any gritters, saying it's up to residents to clear their bit of road and for car drivers to take care? I think those of us who are (relatively, in my case) young and healthy need to have a little more appreciation of the fact that what seems a tiny hazard at best to us can seem a minefield for the elderly and disabled. Pedestrians pay council tax the same as everyone else and deserve a safe environment just as much as all other street users. Oh, and the tone of some seems to imply that this is a "snowflake generation" and that people need to "man up and deal with it" as if it's some modern namby-pambyness which generations past would have dealt with with fortitude and community spirit. Generations past had street sweepers regularly clearing the pavements, and nobody thought that was because people were soft, it was just a natural part of keeping the environment safe and tidy.

titch juicy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You're absolutely right of course. I apologise. No worries!

Henry_17 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Abused cyclists, > > https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2PFRdEUN240 > > Ms BB, > > You mean a kind of Enid Blytonesque gang? That is an absolute joy.

malumbu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Now I could happily spend an evening in the pub > telling you about the numerous incidents over the > last 30 years including being left dead by a hit > and run driver, and road rage. Blimey malumbu, you're undead, going to have to get the old flaming torch out! Otherwise totally agree: case in point - last Friday, unable to cope with the fact that Trump had been elected and Leonard Cohen had died, I thought I'd better ride it out, so did a fifty miler over Epsom Downs, Box Hill and back. There's a cycle lane along the A road from Leatherhead to Box Hill, which I fully intended to use until I found it was ankle deep in leaves - after half a mile of slipping about like Bambi on ice I went on the road...and got massive abuse from (sorry that it's a clich? but it's true) a white van driver who was screaming at me in red-faced apoplexy "We've paid for your farking cycle path and you won't farking use it!" As mentioned above, car drivers - there isn't an obligation to use cycle paths and sometimes there are good reasons not to, and we do have an equal right to use the roads. We're not being "arrogant," we're just choosing the best route for ourselves, quite legally, just as you do in your cars.

I know the Cherry Tree positively encourages them (I think the owners said on here somewhere, limit thirty per customer) and as someone who'd love a dog but hasn't enough garden I love seeing them there!

titch juicy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What on earth are you doing on your bike to elicit > these responses? I've been commute cycling for 8 > years now and never had a single incident or > threat. Well, I've been riding in London for more than thirty years and had plenty...interesting that you assume I must be doing something wrong. As you ask, let's see...the passenger who tried to pull me off the bike at E&C was in a white van that got annoyed as my slowing down and stopping when a traffic light turned amber prevented the driver running it on red...the machete waver was a passenger in a car which I shouted at as it jumped through a red light and nearly hit me...the last person who threw liquid at me was a van driver who shouted I should "ride in the f@cking gutter!" when he was held up for a few yards when I moved out from the kerb (after checking and signalling) to avoid broken glass...the person who spat at me - this was a really weird one - was someone to whom I politely said at the traffic lights, "Just so you know mate, your rear right brake light's out, better get it fixed or you could get a ticket," a hundred yards further on he spat at me as he passed... I'm not perfect by any means but I am very experienced and very careful: I do a lot of miles (150+ most weeks) so maybe I just encounter more nutters. As for cycle lanes, personally I use them myself at every opportunity but there's no legal requirement to do so and certainly drivers don't have a right to start castigating cyclists using the road, they have just as much right to be there as on a road without cycle lanes. ETA Why don't you ask RPC and the OP above "what on earth have you been doing on your bike to elicit such responses"? Just because something's outside your experience doesn't mean it doesn't happen, and I would imagine you're in a lucky minority of people who haven't experienced similar incidents.

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Spitting at someone is classified as battery...and > is illegal- I would imagine sharing any of your > bodily fluids with another without their consent > is also illegal. Even throwing tap water at someone can be classed as battery, so urine very definitely so. If it could be shown that the intent was to make a cyclist fall off then the charges could be raised to attempted GBH, I'd imagine.

I'm hesitant to say this as it might sound a bit stupid, and I'm not trying to belittle the annoyance the buses are obviously causing you, but it could just be that you need to change your mindset. I say this as ten years ago we moved to a flat halfway up Denmark Hill, on the ground floor right next to the road. This meant there was a lot of noise day and night from ambulances, not to mention the helicopter coming low overhead to land in Ruskin Park, sometimes several times a day. I found this very disturbing at first, but then started to say to myself "There's someone's life being saved" every time I heard an ambulance and soon they faded from my consciousness, to the extent that I was quite surprised when guests asked if they disturbed me. Perhaps if you could look at buses in a different light - "there's fifty people who'd be driving their cars past here if there wasn't a bus..." Sometimes a small change of perspective can work wonders...as I said, not belittling your aggravation and maybe it wouldn't work for you, just thought I'd share what worked for me.

I've got a lists of threats/actual violence from cycling in London as long as your arm, malumbu, including having all manner of substances - coffee, soup, beer, spit (though fortunately no urine), takeaway food etc - thrown at me, a passenger waving a machete from the back window, a passenger trying to drag me off by the strap of my bag in the middle of the Elephant gyratory etc etc...but they were all with drivers who felt I'd done something wrong or whom I'd, ahem, admonished. The worrying aspect of cazzr's horrible experience is a) that the victim was chosen at random and b) there seems to be a good deal of preplanning, it's not just some little whatsit deciding to throw their drink can on impulse. If not apprehended I wouldn't be in the least surprised if he gets bored and escalates to pushing cyclists off, throwing solid objects etc. I've been wondering whether to get a GoPro or similar and held off thus far as I don't like the perceived message it sends - "I'm looking out for trouble" - but it certainly would have been handy in this instance.

He could take the tablet to a cafe/library/your place and use that wifi to download to watch offline? But would still need a Prime subscription - though you can get a month's free trial at the moment.

To be honest all photos of a full moon look amazing, if you use the right camera settings and get a good object in the foreground. Mates who live in a very dark bit of country out west and get fabulous celestial views told me it was "a tiny bit bigger than usual, quite nice but nothing to write home about." Still wish we'd had a glimpse though.

PollyGlot, you and Suffer-not should meet up, I reckon you'd find a lot in common, especially as you joined the forum within three days of each other and your first two posts have been to support things Suffer-not has said (including on this thread which has been quiet for nearly a fortnight and would have been buried way down the list, incredible that you even found it) it's the most amazing coincidence. You must be soulmates, I cannot think of any other possible explanation for this remarkable almost telepathic bond you seem to share. No explanation at all.

Now PollyGlot's second ever post is...well blow me down, to support suffer-not's anti-grey squirrel post from weeks back! Really making it a wee bit obvious, Pollysuffer.

First ever post, from someone who joined within three days of suffernot. Hmm... As for people being bullies, "You are a reactionary foul-mouthed left-wing bigot. And a tosspot" isn't exactly pleasant.

What KK said, estate agents are supposed to have a code of ethics (ahem) and if you sign them up to sell for you there are certain T&Cs you agree to to make sure they get their percentage, but as a buyer you've signed up to nothing, no harm in a polite note through the vendors' door - the worst they can do is ignore you. Some years ago we were selling my late aunt's house, someone approached us when we were tidying up the garden to say they'd offered the asking price a few days previously and wondered how we felt about it. First we'd heard...though the day before the agent told us he had a cash buyer who was ready to go at once for ?25K below asking. He then denied ever having received an offer...waited for our contract with him to expire and sold it to the person who offered the asking. He tried to kick off but when we pointed out we could report him to the ombudsman became strangely passive. Go for it and good luck!

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > As the Archbishop of Canterbury pointed out- it is > the poor that suffer most under uncontrolled > immigration Though, as the article you kindly shared makes quite clear, in the same speech he said that the solution for this was for the government to target help to affected communities, not to take fewer refugees - in fact he called for the UK to take more asylum seekers.

Good God man, we are British! How about a group hearty handshake?

Nowhere in ED to escape from 100% cloud cover tonight, I fear. It will be visible tomorrow but sadly the forecast looks equally grim.

Louisa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I do miss Iceland rendel, but I didn't bang on > about it. I jumped in my trusted automobile, and > ventured down the old Kent road where I have since > found a new exciting alternative to the old ED > store. It's a shame we can't arrange once weekly > free transport (some sort of mini bus?), to the > new warehouse store for locals craving an Iceland > fix. I know many less agile people who are openly > quite jealous about my car trips to the new store. > Not that I'm one to gloat. > > Louisa. Ah Louisa, I'm a big fan of your posts but you did bang on just a wee bit! Caf?s and pubs are different anyway, if someone's used to dropping in to the same caf? on their morning school run/exercise/dog walk etc, it's not much consolation to know that they could get in their car and drive two miles to find one similar to the one of which they've been deprived.

Louisa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > More first world problems. Why not just find an > alternative venue which sells the things you miss? > I'm losing the will to live reading some of the > posts on here today. Going for a lay down. > > Louisa. If only everyone could copy the stoical attitude you showed to losing your beloved Iceland Louisa! I don't think you were a great fan of suggestions then that you should "just find an alternative venue which sells the things you miss," were you? I must admit I did at first think it's a caff, get over it - but then I thought some people get just as attached to caf?s as I do to pubs - if my favourite local was taken over and they stopped selling my favourite beers I'd be cross, I can actually see the OP's point.

Stunning effort from the Sun and the Mail here: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/jeremy-corbyn-not-dancing-remembrance-service_uk_5828d511e4b0ec3145f8af9e

No, Loz, what's really to hard to understand is that the left wing, for want of a better name, campaign for one thing, then when people vote for another thing everyone says it's the left wing's fault. The reason Brexit passed, the reason Trump was elected, was because of the right wing's successful campaigns. The people who are responsible, for better or for worse, for Brexit's and Trump's success are the people who voted for them. That's how democracy works, everyone has their own vote and does with it as they wish. If people stand up and say look, I don't want racism, division and hatred then it's absurd to blame them if people vote for the very things they said they were against. Who, precisely, is "trying to control what can and can't be debated"? The left wing agenda is very much more ignored and/or ridiculed in most of the press than the right. ETA: Also, as I've said on this thread before, I think it's deeply patronising to assume that people are such idiots that they didn't know what they were doing when they cast their votes. They did, they made the choice, they won. Again, for better or for worse, they're the ones who chose this outcome, not the people who asked them not to.

Excellent, so much so worth actually sharing the text: PEOPLE who disagree with Donald Trump and Nigel Farage are responsible for their success rather than the gullible idiots who vote for them, the media have decided. Commentators believe Trump?s victory and Brexit could have been avoided if everyone stopped having reasonable views and agreed with mad, barely coherent grievances. Guardian columnist Donna Sheridan said: ?If tolerant people had listened to mental Trump supporters they wouldn?t have voted for him due to some magical process I can?t explain. ?It?s the same with Brexit. We should have been saying, ?There there, it?s not your fault you have to be racist because you haven?t got an amazing job and the Polish shop makes you angry.? ?Liberals like me may as well have marched Trump and Brexit supporters to the polling station and made them vote with a gun at the their head, but obviously we?d never do that because we?re too nice.? Political pundit Tom Booker said: ?We need to listen to ordinary people, even if it?s hard to work out what their point is except that all politicians are basically criminals and we won the war.?

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- Since between them the Sun, DM and DE have a total > sales of under 4 million- and there are people who > only read the sport, or only do the puzzle pages. > > I think that most people make up their minds about > what is going on in the UK from their own daily > experiences. That rather disregards the fact that most papers are shared between people - a family sharing the one paper, papers shared between workmates, etc - so the real readership is a lot higher than the actual sales. Plus, of course, the internet, with the DM website, God help mankind, apparently the most popular in the world. People make a lot of decisions on the basis of what they see around them, but when it comes to something requiring expert analysis - for example, the economic benefits or otherwise of Brexit - surely they can only rely on the information gleaned from the press?