rendelharris

According to TfL there is excess bus capacity in and around central London, partly due to the cycling boom and "improved rail services"(!) and so they're shifting capacity to the outer boroughs where it's more needed. They claim there will actually be more "bus kilometres" post-restructuring than before. Whether there's any truth or justification in this, I know not (so don't shoot the messenger).

betternowthanthen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- Southwark and its staff need to be put in their > place, this borough is getting worse with rubbish > schemes like these, please sign against this to > stop this! Poor people who live in this road are > nearly completely cut off, and emergency vehicles, > did they even think about that? Having had a closer look at this scheme I tend to agree it's probably a bad one for the displacement effect it will cause - however it's a bit dramatic to say that. If you live on Champion Hill you won't be cut off, if you live above the corner you'll have to go round via Denmark Hill (three minutes maximum, probably), if you live below nothing's changed. Emergency vehicles (which generally would prefer a wider main road anyway, when I lived on CH we heard them a lot on Denmark Hill but only saw them on CH if they were coming to an address on that road) will be allowed to travel through the no-entry, as they are generally.

JoeLeg Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I really try hard not to actively hate people, as > it?s such a waste of energy, but Kate Hoey is such > an unpleasant individual, actively abusing her > position, that she really makes me fume. Just give her your contempt - one of my favourite quotes from Casablanca: "You despise me, don't you Rick?" "Well I probably would if I gave it any thought." She is a pretty unpleasant character though I agree, a bigoted right-wing libertarian somehow still hypocritically drawing down a very nice wage as a Labour MP.

Abe_froeman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Lots of self-pwning going on here. Translation please?

spider69 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > After pupils never understood, is that why you > gave up teaching? They did understand, thanks, the reasons I quit teaching had nothing to do with the pupils.

KidKruger Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sue: I'm not inclined to agree I'm afraid. It's > denotes ownership, in my sentence. "It's course" > (the course belonging to the thread). > > Keep at it though....! No no no no no KK! It's can only ever be an abbreviation for it is/has. The possessive for the pronoun it never takes an apostrophe. To be fair this is a concept that many find difficult, I've probably spent more time as a teacher explaining that than any other rule.

MarkT Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 6. 8th Bullet point: ?65% of respondents would > like it to operate Monday to Friday?. How can that > be true when only 49% of respondents want any form > of CPZ? Well, logically it can - "Do you want a CPZ?" and "If a majority choose CPZ, do you want it full time or weekdays only?" are two different questions.

Somewhat ironic as you are/have been one of the chief drivers of a lot of the T&D on the forum. However, I sincerely wish you the best of luck with your health issues and a speedy recovery. Rendel

Given you're not going to get any joy out of the neighbour by the sound of it (though if s/he's being aggressive and stealing a word with the landlord/police could be in order), a HEPA air purifier might help - around ?50 up. Alternatively I have heard, though not tried, that soaking a piece of bread in white wine vinegar and leaving it in a dish in the area in question absorbs smoke smells well.

It may interest Uncle to know that a fair number of those good PEOPLE have changed their mind since: https://www.essexlive.news/news/essex-news/essex-constituencies-switching-seats-leave-1891241

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > And I certainly do not correct others for their > Grammar. Just for everything else, and frequently erroneously. P.S. I haven't corrected your grammar, I'm just laughing at your pompously ironic reaction.

herne hilly Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > i started reading this and thought the same as > someone previously, how lovely everyone was being, > but then everyone went straight to pre judging the > poor driver. I hope she is ok, as it must have > been quite frightening. > > From my own driving around south london, is that > people have NO patience what so ever and some > drivers will be beeping like crazy which can > panic/fluster people. Things like turning out of > side roads, or allowing on coming cars down a > narrow road. > Personally , i take no notice of these impatient > drivers and only go when i think its safe, its > always just a few seconds, but everyone is in such > a hurry because there is so much traffic ! Fair point - I'm in no way a fan of the motor car and am the first to castigate bad drivers, but for all we know this person could have swerved to avoid a child who'd run into the road or been forced off line by someone else's bad driving.

IlonaM Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Oh, I'd be pretty p'd off if someone corrected me > after a long day as well. It wasn't really > necessary, especially given some of the howlers I > see on the Forum. Indeed, but DF is the #1 corrector of others hereabouts.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > KidKruger Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > ?have? > > Pedant.. You cannot help yourself. Get a life. You appear to have struck a particularly rich vein of irony today DF, even by your standards.

Eh? More people disagree with me than agree with me which proves that lots of other people agree with me but don't say so?

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- ....why do you people ALWAYS have to > bring in your lefty agenda! Why do you always have to bring in your Islamaphobic, anti-semitic and anti-immigration agenda? A week or so ago you managed to get an anti-semitic comment into a thread on a dangerous window, so accusing others of dragging in agendas is pretty rich even by your utterly absurd standards.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Asset Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > OMG, I'm agreeing with DulwichFox! > > > > I used to work in a kitchen and the NOS > canisters > > were a fun way to pass the time occasionally > > despite the resulting headache :-) > > Lots of people agree with The Fox on many Topics. > Its just that most people will not openly admit to > it on here. > They only ever post when they disagree. > > Fact. > > Foxy And when, as with his assertion about N2O cylinders not being used for whipped cream makers above (with a big capital NOT), he's completely factually incorrect.

Before anyone gets too hysterical about this, shall we wait for some facts? The Southwark News report says that "residents fear it could take months" - where does the sixty weeks figure quoted above come from (I've looked all over and can't find any information)? Also the gas company says the work will be done in several phases so it's not as if Rye Lane will be fully closed for a year. It might be awful or it might be slightly inconvenient, but it's not helpful for everyone to create these apocalyptic scenarios (and start shoehorning their own agendas about blocking the Southwark Spine etc) before we have any idea of what the scope or nature of the works will be!

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rendelharris Wrote: > CO2 is good for carbonating water (hence > > the name) > > Surely Carbon dioxide is called that because it > has one carbon atom and two oxygen atoms in the > molecule? > > Nothing to do with carbonating water? > > Have I misunderstood? Did you mean a different > name? No - as above, if you force carbon dioxide gas into water under pressure it dissolves, creating carbonic acid, and making carbonated water. ETA I mean hence the name of carbonated water, not hence the name of carbon dioxide!

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The Cartridiges used in Soda Syphons a Whipped > Cream makers containe C02 Carbon Dioxide, NOT N20 > Nitrous Oxide. The cartridges in soda syphons are CO2, the cartridges in whipping syphons for whipped cream are N2O. CO2 is good for carbonating water (hence the name) but if used on cream it will give it an acid taste.

Passiflora Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Not sure what you mean JoeLeg as the developer in > this case is Southwark Council? I'm very willing to stand corrected but I assume (as SC don't have a massive cohort of workers ready to run up buildings) this will be "in partnership" with a private developer?

I get the impression that by "local" they mean very immediate area and the rest will go to Southwark residents - that's what the Housing Plan says anyway. JoeLeg - absolutely, we only need to look at the disgrace of the Heygate development to see how developers (aided, abetted and even funded by our own dear council) can get away with murder between planning permission and reality.

Charles Martel Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Passiflora Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Oh dear, surely the OP and others are just > > boasting about what they can and can't do to a > > property, when there are other people desperate > > for a home? > > Don't worry. Comrade Corbyn's socialist paradise > is just around the corner. > By gum, I know it's only October but I think you've won the EDF's "Golden Shoehorn" award for 2018 with that one!

I think you need to Google "passive aggressive" Robbin - it doesn't mean what you seem to think it does. Alternatively, you could read your last post, which is a fine example of it!

Thank you Robbin, I'm not trying to be "trendy", nor do I believe that corruption is worse in Britain than in other parts of the EU. Just pointing out that your (trendy?) insistence that things are worse in the EU is fairly nonsensical. Stating facts is not trying "to run down the UK" - it's stating facts. Your language has a whiff of McCarthyism about it - you'll be asking why I don't go and live in Europe if it's so great next.