rendelharris

civilservant Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > hey you lot, tone it down > > i read the OP's post before it was taken down and > i thought that she had every reason to believe > that her family had been badly treated - she might > not have been right about the reason why, but you > don't know the truth of the matter either. > whatever that was, it's distressing enough to > think you're getting unfair treatment, when it not > just you but your family also involved. > > so hold off on the ad hominem attacks and let's > see if the pub can help set the record straight > > fwiw, OP, calling admin's actions 'tragic' is just > a bit excessive No sorry I ain't going for that, the idea that a pub in this neck of the woods would deliberately discriminate against BAME people is frankly ludicrous. I'm tiresomely politically correct but I'm not going for this one. Why has the OP deleted her post?

I've just run a search on Twitter for the Crown and Greyhound, oddly nothing relating to this terrible racist incident comes up. Surely you must tell your 3000 followers about it asap?

Your post was probably removed because it was an entirely unjustified accusation of racism which was frankly rather silly, which I must say didn't accord with my and my BAME wife's experience of the Dog. I entirely understand why admin had to remove your post, because it was utterly stupid and libelous. Could you please give us a link to your Twitter account, because I'd love to tell your alleged 3000 followers why you're an arse.

Jellybeanz, I'm very sensitive to racism, being married to a BAME person myself, but I can't actually see anything in your post that proves racism. If I'm wrong, I'm sorry, but this just sounds like an incompetent bit of management rather than racism - there have have been a lot of posts on this forum about how the new management of the Dog are incompetent. I've had a few pints in there recently (with my wife) and seen no evidence of racism, though plenty of incompetence, with lots of people of all races enjoying a pint. With respect, I think you're mistaking stupid incompetent behavior for racism. ETA if it is racism, you should escalate it to the nth degree and I'd entirely support you, but again, sounds more like stupid incompetence. The alternative is that a pub in a multicultural area is actively discriminating against BAME people, which frankly seems rather unlikely.

ali2007 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So are we saying that I risk getting a fine for > walking the path or risk getting robbed \ raped \ > muddy for taking the overgrown path? Rather overdramatic, but anyway, no. As noted on another heated thread on here, the road and horse track are not dog-free or on-lead areas so as long as you keep him/her out of the clearly marked no dog or onlead areas you won't be fined. > This is a public space. If I have understood this > correctly, it?s very sad news indeed. Public places need rules, indeed more so than most places. Just because it's a public place doesn't imply the public can do what they want in it. That road in Dulwich Park would be ideal for me to practice timetrialling on, I don't because there are speed rules in place and it would be selfish and stupid to do so. These new dog rules, or rather mainly the enforcement of extant rules, seem a perfectly sensible and proportionate way of balancing the rights and needs of all park users.

Carrie Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Colour makes People Happy has moved to Camberwell > - he said he was opening up next door to the > sexual health clinic! Well, people coming out of there probably need cheering up a bit...

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I accidentally trod on a snail on my path the > other day. I didn?t kill it but broke its shell > and squashed it a bit. It can certainly be said to > have suffered trauma in the physical sense and its > demise probably wasn?t far away. > > I doubt however it experienced psychological > trauma and considered going to the snail > equivalent of Switzerland to end it all given its > life changing injuries. Don't know if you're aware of this, but snails aren't mammals.

Jules-and-Boo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I just meant that animals have every reason to > fear humans. True - due to the trauma we've caused them, which keano77 appears to believe is imaginary.

Thanks for your cleanup efforts, admin.

Jules-and-Boo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > paranoia isn't the right word. That suggests an > imaginary fear. Well, paranoia can refer to excessive anxiety over things that aren't imaginary - for example one could be paranoid about crocodiles, which are a real threat but one unlikely to be encountered in East Dulwich. But "a heightened sense of threat" if you prefer!

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Agreed Rendel. It?s the use of the word trauma in > a psychological sense that amused me. > > Humans shout at dogs every day, dogs bark and > fight other dogs, dogs chase cats, cats fight > other cats and chase and kill mice and birds, > birds eat worms and insects, insects eat other > insects, big fish eat smaller fish. > > If we?re using such words out of context in a > sloppy manner then the whole animal and insect > kingdom must be having a psychological traumatic > meltdown. It is, paranoia is the natural preservation state of the animal kingdom, that's why nearly all animals flee from humans.

It's a real shame "A nice collection of worthless wall hangings" isn't a real thing, that would have been a great thread.

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rendelharris Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > keano77 Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > The bit about the dogs returned home > > traumatised > > > amused me. > > > > Glad you found it so funny. Dogs do suffer > trauma > > and it's pitiful to see, I once had a Battersea > > dog that had belonged to an elderly couple who > had > > beaten her with their sticks, she would cringe > and > > whimper whenever she was near an old person with > a > > stick. The fact that these persons who > presumably > > style themselves as dog lovers saw fit to be > > aggressive towards someone else's dog was, I > > thought, the most unpleasant part of the whole > > distasteful episode. Still, as long as it gave > > you a chuckle. > > anthropomorphism Rendel - ascribing human concepts > and notions to animals etc. I suspect the OP?s > dogs were doing what dogs do seconds after being > shouted at with no ill effects. Why you choose to > believe the dogs suffered some adverse > psychological episode is beyond me. All mammals share some traits and it's ridiculous to deny that. Any animal that's suffered a traumatic event will show signs of it, do you believe dogs don't have a psychology? The dividing line between humans and animals is an entirely arbitrary one.

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The bit about the dogs returned home traumatised > amused me. Glad you found it so funny. Dogs do suffer trauma and it's pitiful to see, I once had a Battersea dog that had belonged to an elderly couple who had beaten her with their sticks, she would cringe and whimper whenever she was near an old person with a stick. The fact that these persons who presumably style themselves as dog lovers saw fit to be aggressive towards someone else's dog was, I thought, the most unpleasant part of the whole distasteful episode. Still, as long as it gave you a chuckle.

Robert Poste's Child Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Looks like the three people who've made complaints > above are all first-time posters with profiles > created today. You may well have a good reason for > doing that. On the other hand you might be one > person with an agenda. Good spot! Stylistically very similar too.

Good heavens. Well, eejits often ask why vegetarians/vegans want things that taste like meat. From my point of view, having been a vegetarian for thirty years and a vegan for twenty, I gave up meat on ethical and environmental grounds, I loved meat until I gave it up and have always wanted to find a good simulacrum... So this burger...quite extraordinary. As close to meat as I've ever tasted, frankly (being a greedy bugger) I would happily have eaten about five of them. Don't know how they do it but it was bloody (literally) delicious. Highly recommended. On a slight down note the chips were absolutely rubbish, they need to sort that out. But other than that, superb.

Louisa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Like all good things in this neighbourhood, the > Harvester was a victim of the dreaded G word. Louisa, I entirely respect your status as one of the elder statespersons of the neighbourhood, and I'm a comparative incomer having only knocked around this neck of the woods since 1997, but with all respect, I don't think everything's gone to the bad since the good old days, has it? There have been some improvements!

Lynne Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The Dulwich society owns the Harvester? Estate, not society (technically not the College, which is funded by the Estate).

Before anyone says it, I'm absolutely not saying everything in the garden's lovely, but I was interested to use this calculator on the BBC website: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-44045128 and see that for South Camberwell, there have been thirty-four moped crimes in the last five years, and only twelve of them were robberies by people on mopeds (the rest were thefts of mopeds, which I know is serious). Just thought it lent an interesting perspective, when a foreigner reading the Evening Standard (or indeed this forum, on occasion) might get the impression that it was a rarity to walk anywhere round here and not be the victim of a moped robbery. Again, not saying it's insignificant or that it isn't terrible for victims, just thought others might like to try their postcodes and see whether the actual level of crime matches up to their perception of it - I know it didn't for me!

eastdulwich_dweller Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Large trading floors pay for the service to be > done quickly as they lose more money each day > things aren't running. Retail banking (where more > and more people are banking online and businesses > are taking cards) is a lot slower on the refit > front. Barclays made ?3bn+ profit last year, they could afford to do it more quickly, closing a branch for eleven weeks is just showing contempt for their customers, especially their elderly customers who rely on "real" banks more than most.

In my general role as EDF bike advocate/bore, if you fancy cycling you can get from ED to Green Park in half an hour or so by bike, with only about a mile and a half on quiet roads and the rest on segregated cycle paths. If you ever need a guide to the route some Sunday give me a shout, Mrs H and I would be happy to show you the way, or check out the Southwark Cyclist bike trains - Sally Eva of this forum a good person to talk to. Cheers, Rendel

Well played EDh and EDF!

I entirely agree P68 - but as this person, clearly a friend of the couple in question, feels it appropriate to accuse people saying it wasn't a good thing for two men to be screaming "fat bitch" in the park at someone who hadn't done them any harm (and nor had her dog) of lacking in "emotional intelligence", I feel the H word can't be far behind.

robbin Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > And btw, a stranger aggressively shouting at > someone in a park, in the manner described, may > amount to a crime. Perhaps not a serious crime, > but a crime nonetheless. If you think otherwise > (i.e. that shouting is not, per se, capable of > being a crime) then you are wrong. Agreed, and it seems that at least three other people have had bad experiences with this couple which tends to lend the OP a good deal of credibility. Accusations of homophobia coming in 3,2,1...

Is it just because I'm getting old, or does everything seem to take a ridiculously long time these days? When I was a student I sometimes worked for a friend's father's office fitting company in the summer vacation; often we'd do offices in the city where they had to be refitted between close of business one day and opening the next, so we'd refit a large trading floor overnight, or at worst over a weekend. Now any roadworks, refits etc seem to take extraordinary amounts of time...