rendelharris

I was just going to say, Dogger wins the prize for textual analysis!

richard tudor Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rendelharris Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Well apparently I've interpreted something as > > racist, supported by evidence. Suits me. > > > I think I have missed this evidence. what was it? You haven't missed any evidence, Richard (lovely to see you're still bitterly following me around by the way, missed you sweetie) - you and adonirum have both managed to conclusively miss the point though. Ain't no thing.

Well, haven't the time to illustrate how to parse a sentence I'm afraid, never mind.

Well apparently I've interpreted something as racist, supported by evidence. Suits me.

adonirum Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Had a read, tried to, but couldn't > resist...again......damn...... > You interpreted something somebody > wrote as racist, even when supported by > "evidence". You may wish to edit this?

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > BrandNewGuy Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > The local crows didn't seem too upset by his > presence. > > Far from being intimidated, haven't crows been > known to "gang up" on larger birds? Seem to > remember it happened at a bird show in Dulwich > Park a couple of years back. Yep, "mobbing" it's called and they will do it to kestrels, most especially if they have young, but as a general rule they steer clear of kestrels as they're way faster and better armed. When it comes to a heron with a fish that's a very different matter!

That sounds the same feller, I must try and get a picture of him. I too noticed a surprising lack of perturbation even amongst the pigeon population.

Good for you. Still failing to see anything in Cella's posts which justifies your rudeness to her though.

Reckon there's plenty of shitehawks and scavengers still left in the city....you're right, nesting sites would be a problem for the larger raptors but wouldn't it be great to see them...

For no reason except bird lovers might like it...earlier this year got to handle one bald eagle and it was one of the loveliest things I've ever been privileged to enjoy, this makes me want to get a ticket to Alaska right now...

edhistory Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Cella, > > I don't think you have any expertise in this > area. > > It is unhelpful to post, and continue to post, > incorrect information. > > John K It's really not overhelpful to be utterly pompous and rude though, don't you think? Your post listed quite a lot of information but as far as I could see didn't actually explain anything about the situation. If you think someone's wrong, politely explain why - what's your "expertise", by the way?

cella Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- It's entirely right that > cyclists and road users are considered for better > road facilities and I do think that pedestrians > deserve consideration too. I quite agree Cella, but it does appear from the OP (and I'm willing to stand corrected) that Southwark are not disputing the amount of space employed, they're just asking to be paid for it.

Duvaller Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200083/roadworks_ > and_highway_improvements/605/obstructions_on_roads > _and_pavements Clearly irrelevant if what the OP wrote is the case, and one has no reason to suppose it is not: "I've just been into Dulwich DIY and they said the council is threatening to start charging them for displaying goods on the pavement outside the front of the shop. It is not a health and safety issue. They have been there for over 30 years and have always used the outside area and need help in making a case against having to pay a fee on top of their business rates. The council have apparently agreed to consider their case if they can prove that they have been displaying goods outside for over 10 years." It's nothing to do with whether they're allowed to have displays outside the shop, but whether or not they should have to pay a fee so to do. Look at the wrong end of the stick, that's the bit you've latched onto.

Sally Eva Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I want to see a red kite in London, competing with > the foxes for roadkill and takeaways That would be superb - you don't have to drive far north of London to see them in great proliferation over Oxfordshire, maybe they'll move south soon...

Interesting EDH, so who owns what - and if Southwark have rights over the pavement, why will they not charge DDY if they can prove pavement displays for ten years? Is there a sort of "squatter's rights" element at play?

BrandNewGuy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Unusual that you saw it cycling ;-) It was > probably a kestrel ? they're sometimes seen over > Peckham Rye Common and Green Dale too ? but it > could be a young peregrine. I've recently seen a > pair of youngsters flying around the Salvation > Army College tower at Denmark Hill. At this time > of year, their parents are kicking them out of the > family home, so to speak, so young peregrines can > be seen around and about, looking for new > territory. Greater London now has about 40 > breeding pairs, so space is getting limited. > B*oody housing crisis! :-) Think it was a kestrel - could have been a peregrine though...I used to live near the summit of Denmark Hill and used to see the falcons that temporarily roosted atop King's trying to hit pigeons, an amazing sight. Yeah, nearly everything I see is out cycling, I do cover rather a lot of ground...

adonirum: the original post simply asked for any pictures which could support Dulwich DIY in their effort to prove that they had had pavement displays for more than ten years so they wouldn't have to pay Southwark's demands for rental of the pavement space. Then a certain person came on complaining that DDY were making East Dulwich look like New Dehli. I and others have responded to that. Who hijacked the thread initially? ETA: "In the absence of face-to-face contact, how do you manage to interpret that Duvaller is being/is a racist? You cannot hear the tone of the/any words being spoken, you cannot read body language, you have nothing to safely base your supposition on, for that is what you are clearly doing, you're just supposing, arbitrarily deciding that that is how it is, according to your own prejudices." Seriously, you don't think that one can make a judgement of someone's opinions or attitudes by the words they write? You have to hear those words spoken by a person to know what they mean, what they write is not enough? Have you really thought this through? You are of course accusing other people of being "so wrapped up in your own importance, that you don't even realise what you are writing" without hearing them say those words face to face, how does making that judgement accord with your previous statement? Are you perhaps "arbitrarily deciding that that is how it is, according to your own prejudices"? Or do your own arbitrary standards not apply to your good self?

Ain't lived or worked in Nigeria either, but if someone said that an African owned store made East Dulwich look like Lagos I'd call 'em racist. You've made a racist allusion - consciously or not - and no amount of "I've been to India" changes that I'm afraid.

You described a shop owned by Asians (and whether or not they're actually from New Dehli is irrelevant) as making East Dulwich look like New Dehli. Fact, as silly people like to say. The only thing that's pathetic is your attempt to justify your racism. ETA I'm married to a woman of Asian heritage and spend a lot of time with her 1st generation immigrant parents and extended family so I do know rather a lot about India, thanks. Oh and you haven't even read the original post properly, the issue is not about how far Dulwich DIY's displays encroach on the pavement but whether or not the council are going to force them to pay for the space. Fact!

For those interested, there's a raptor of some description in BP at the moment, we saw it cycling through there this morning (we were cycling, not it) about 8AM. We didn't have binoculars so can't be positive but fairly sure it's an adult kestrel. No idea if it was just passing through or a resident, but worth looking out for, for those who like that sort of thing (as we do!). Cheers, R

Dog Kennel Hill Sainsbury's, back of the car park. Best to go in the daytime as the night seems to attract the odd strange character waiting to scavenge - probably perfectly harmless but better safe...

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Doubt anyone here watched but a classy tribute to > Anthony Foley today at Thomond Park both on and > off the pitch. Caught some brief highlights including the tributes, wonderful. Remember him well playing for Ireland - saw him twice in the 5N/6N either side of the turn of the century - immense player, very sad indeed.

Charles Notice Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If you had looked at the post by Duvaller you > would have realised who wrote this. > > I have amended the post to show this so you will > not get confused. Charles, my sincerest apologies for the error. Without quotations it does look as though "Suspect a complaint has been put in" refers to the shop, and "cannot have ED brought down to this level" looks like complaining about East Dulwich, rather than the forum, brought down. I just saw nxjen's comment about someone making a New Dehli reference and scrolled up to yours which, unamended, was confusing. Apologies again. Duvalier, you should be ashamed of yourself for your not even thinly veiled racism.

Charles Notice Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This is a problem that Dulwich DIY have made for > themselves. It has hints of New Delhi where shop > building extensions encroach on the pavement. > > Suspect a complaint has been put in. Cannot have > ED brought down to this level I thought this was a bit of trolling, then saw some of your other posts and realised it's not, you're really like that. Given that Dulwich DIY is owned and run by Asians the "hints of New Delhi" comment is out and out racism, you should be thoroughly ashamed of yourself.

In the cycle lanes at rush hour there are hundreds of cyclists going in both directions, so it wouldn't be a question of slowing down temporarily to pass, it would cause a total bottleneck. Imagine a 40MPH A road at rush hour where one group of users, driving wide vehicles, never got above 15mph and you'd have some idea of the chaos it would cause. Anyway, I think we've talked this one to death now, don't you? It's a total red herring anyway, as mobility scooters are banned from cycle lanes and in my opinion altering that status - which you're the first person I've ever heard question - would be as foolhardy as allowing cyclists to ride on the pavement. Let's just agree to disagree shall we? Cheers, R