rendelharris

malumbu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Thanks all for the advice. Farage drinks in some > of my 'local' pubs in Victoria/Westminster so I > will be avoiding them. With our new exciting > relationship with China, the US and Russia there > will be plenty of skiing opportunities outside of > Europe. And don't forget the oncoming nuclear winter Trump seems determined to cause, which will be like, the best, most widespread, like record-breaking winter ever, way better than any winter Obama ever managed.

A pair of beautiful small but perfectly formed greater spotted woodpecker fledglings in the garden on Copleston Road a few days back, exhibiting a behaviour I've never seen before: they seemed to be making repeated passes through the stream of the little ornamental fountain in the pond, though whether to catch a drink or just get a bit of water on them (it was one of the scorching days) I don't know. I know there are plenty of insects hanging over ponds, but they were quite definitely deliberately flying straight into the stream.

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yes unfortunately there are some areas where you > could put a red rosette on a donkey and it would > get elected Hope for you yet then. Funny how democracy's all fine until you don't get your own way, isn't it? Sure any suggestion that Brexit voters were ill-informed or misguided would be met with squeals of outrage from you, but when the vote doesn't go your way, out come the insults. Extremely poor manners, by the way, to make a comment like that on a thread where a new councillor has come to introduce himself and tell people how to get in touch. I suggest you would do well to look at Mr.Barber's gracious and generous response to his defeat and try to learn something.

Let's see...random image with embed code from Imgur, seems to work.

flocker spotter Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > get them waggons into a circle boys. Irony not your forte, I see...

flocker spotter Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sue Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > flocker spotter Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > It is > > > also a shame that your post has spun off into > a > > > petty bicker thread. Again > > > > > > > > You think it's "petty bickering" to suggest > that > > reporting suspicious behaviour to the police is > a > > good idea? > > > > You have a strange idea of petty bickering :)) > > Don't do this. It is tiresome. Not as tiresome as your operating as some sort of unofficial monitor for the forum, FS, continually telling people to stop doing this that and the other, that seems to be your thing. Why don't you leave it to Admin, who do/does a fine job? Sue's point was perfectly valid, by the way.

cosmonaut Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This came out of nowhere to me (and to a lot of > other people, apparently). No leaflets about it or > anything. Nothing I can see on Southwark's website for road closures, and I haven't see any of the usual lamppost signs - perhaps it's an emergency?

Yes, I'm going to go back in the day as well to see the animals - I had a chat with the CEO and she told me "Nothing gets your thoughts straight better than chatting with an alpaca." Need to try that. By the way, she told me that they hire out for meetings/workshops as well (that's why she told me about the alpacas, apparently people like to go and talk to them in their "breakout" time!), be a great place for that.

Oh that is good news, I'm not even much of a football fan, the oval ball being more my thing, but knowing what it means to the fans and community it's very pleasing. Hopefully this is a portent for a win over the greedy bugger developers as well and they can start in the higher echelon back at their rightful home!

camberwell70 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Rendell, who says, ever, I was having a chat with > a black guy? I was having a chat with a gay guy? Most people, in my experience. It's a natural linguistic trait to add an adjective to the noun to add more information for the reader/listener - "this tall woman got on the train", "A bald guy came over", "A black guy helped me push the car". Listen to people talking, it's a part of speech.

camberwell70 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Its nonsense what you are saying. > > i thought you were intelligent. Jings, nobody I know, including my dear wife, thinks that, but you could say why?

Not assault, but under S4 of the Public Order Act there'd certainly be a case for a charge of "Causing fear or provocation of violence" - two men with a dog shouting obscenities at a woman sounds pretty like. Or indeed behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace would be a another option. But not assault though (legally, though obviously it can certainly feel like one when faced with it). N.B. re the "obviously gay" thing, at the risk of causing annoyance some people are, through behaviour, language, dress etc, fairly obviously gay, aren't they? I must admit I might say "I was having a chat with this gay bloke in a pub" in the same way I might say "I was having a chat with this black guy" or whatever, just an identifier. Certain the OP didn't mean any offence, though given the context perhaps "obviously a couple" would have conveyed the same meaning and not risked upsetting anyone.

In a funny way it's been quite useful for the charity for which I volunteer: every fortnight I send a newsletter to around 600 partner volunteer organisations, asking them to opt back in has given us a clearer picture of who's reading our materials, who might have dropped off the radar, who's changed their email and not notified us etc. But it has been a pain for a lot of smaller one man band type charities, I know.

Like many, many people on the other thread, I was tremendously impressed by JB (shouldn't there be a tribute bench on GG or something? I'd subscribe!) even though he was not of a party for which I naturally have sympathy. But the proof of the pudding will be in the eating, these guys have won a free and fair election and gained the votes of a majority of residents, so let's see what they can do rather than start their tenure with a negative approach! The fact that he's already reaching out on the forum is a positive sign, no?

Toffee Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What a vile, offensive thread. Vile and offensive eh? Either one would be bad enough. Still, at least nobody's tried to call someone out for a fight because someone disagrees with their silly opinions yet... http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?20,1842529,1843012#msg-1843012

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rendelharris Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Exactly, one silly instance immediately > dismissed > > and people like you, a walking Daily Mail, > start > > saying "oh yes it happened to me." Didn't. > > Google 'brainstorm insensitive' and you will find > umpteen examples- I picked the one I linked > because it was from that odious of rags that you > love so much....we WERE instructed not to use the > word- I don't care what you say or think rh > (feeling of deja vu now) and i'm sure there is an > adjective that describes YOUR kind - I've probably > used it myself If you Google "brainstorm insensitive" it comes up with four results relating to whether or not it's wrong to use the term. Four. Is that umpteen? I know you tell an awful lot of lies in your frothing rants ("I met this east European immigrant in the pub and he told me...") but it's foolish to tell lies that are so easily checked and dismissed.

Second all the above, your efforts in answering and chasing up issues raised on here have been exemplary. At least now you can have a well-earned breather!

Think not unless the byelaws have changed; when I lived in Lambeth there was a blanket ban on barbeques in all Lambeth parks.

JohnL Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > @GuyVerhofstadt > "Today, Nigel Farage said Belgium is not a real > country. He'll see how real Belgium is when we > play England in the World Cup" > > LOL Damn, I lived there for several years, if we'd known it wasn't a real country we wouldn't have paid our taxes!

Just been to a great gig at the above mentioned, watching the wondrous Elliott Morris (look him up on YouTube),an astonishingly good guitarist. Lovely atmosphere, great people, very reasonably priced (?9 a ticket if bought online, ?3 for a bottle of beer) well worth a visit. All profits go back into the farm to help their work with schoolchildren, riding for the disabled etc. First Thursday of every month. Give it a go, we're going back! N.B. I have no connection whatsoever with VCF,in fact despite teaching at a school round the corner from them for quite a few years this was my first visit, just thought people might like to know about it and they deserve some publicity.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don't dislike Sidiq Khan. I believe his policies > on Congestion, pollution and it's effect on > peoples health are correct. I just think his > Transport policies creates a situation where there > is a shortfall. > > This thread is about those shortfalls with > reference to the 176 route. and not about health > issues. > > Sidiq Khan (along with T.F.L.) is responsible > for these shortfalls and has reneged on his > pre-electon promises about fare prices and > improving our Transport systems. He lied to us. > > It's Sabotage in the true sense or the word. > > Sabourtage:- Deliberately destroy, damage, or > obstruct (something), especially for political > advantage. > > It's Nothing personal. > > Hope that answers all your requests to explain > myself. > > DulwichFox 1. His name's Sadiq, common courtesy to get that right. 2. His pledge on freezing all fares was scuppered by the suburban rail companies, over whom he has no control, refusing to play ball and, as noted above, the government reneging on the deal to give TfL control of same because, basically, they feared he'd make a success of it and didn't want to give a Labour mayor the kudos. He's frozen all the fares over which he has control. 3. Thanks for the dictionary definition, although you've actually managed to spell that wrong as well. So you genuinely believe that Mr.Khan is deliberately damaging London's transport system for political advantage? Get oop t'street, lad. I'd love to know how you think that's going to win him votes. No mention of the government and their withdrawal of ?700M per annum and how that might do a little sabotage to London's transport system, I note.

dbboy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > And the Lib Dems where going door to door as I > passed through at lunch time, didn't think they > were allowed to do so on polling day? No, there's a ban on broadcasting campaigns imposed by Ofcom, but at a local level you can campaign all you like as long as you don't do it near polling stations.

wolis Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > To be fair to the OP. There is a company called DG > Splasbacks based in Robertsbridge, Surrey with a > very good website. So this might not be a dodgy > post. Admin can see the IP addresses of forum members, so knew that this person who was so delighted with DG Splashbacks was the same person who was posting as DG Splashbacks previously. Also, how many people would join a forum just to tell people how delighted they were with their splashback?!

Exactly, one silly instance immediately dismissed and people like you, a walking Daily Mail, start saying "oh yes it happened to me." Didn't.

JoeLeg Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Come on now, be fair. > > You?ve asked a straight question and Foxy has > obfuscated, whatabouted and outright ignored them > both, instead putting across a politicians answer > that seeks to paint him as the victim rather than > address the issue in front of him. > > What else can you ask of him? Fair enough, I'm a fool to meself.