Dogkennelhillbilly

I am not clear what you are saying here. Are you saying that the "members" of OneDulwich that met with Cllr McAsh are actually just the two Tory candidates?

Knowing Uber/Lime, that's almost certainly not Lime doing anything, but one of its totally independent, definitely not a disguised worker subcontractors. The gig economy is rough.

You've actually just brilliantly demonstrated the OneDulwich playbook: object to the issue, deny any data exists, and then when presented with the data, begin a metaphysical conversation about what the meaning of "data" is in relation to some other subject. 👏🤣

Yes. Number of identifiable "members" of the OneDulwich "group" to date: 1. Number of opaque anti-LTN "groups" for which that member acts as a spokesman: 2. Number of political parties exactly aligned with OneDulwich to date: 1.

I did a little experiment of reporting yesterday and: 1) although the app captures the location of the bike when you create the report, I have received an (automated?) follow up email asking me to supply the location of the bike 2) there seems to be a maximum number of reports you can make per day, maybe around 10...which is a problem when there is a broken or badly parked bike every bloody fifteen steps! Actually, I was wrong about this. I walked past again yesterday - I hadn't realised how long the bike bay was. It does in fact go 2 or 2.5 metres across the charity shopfront too. Apologies.

Does it? Is there any data to back that up...? 🤣

That's partially true, but OneDulwich claims to be a group that represents local residents, and that's the basis on which its repetitive and disingenuous questions on data should be entertained for years on end. But is it actually a group or just a guy with an email address and a knack for PR? Evidently not the Tory candidates' - they positioned the last council election as a referendum on LTNs, and were demolished. The very local community has kind of taken a decision on this issue through the medium of elections...

Yes, it's definitely a conspiracy between the evil geniuses at Southwark Council, Thames Water, and Thames Water's contractor to something something something LTNs. That's definitely the most plausible explanation that any reasonable person would land on. 🙄 #southwarkderangementsyndrome

Ahh, I've found it. It's not bad. If anyone else has the app and is looking for it - click on the little outline of a person in the top left hand corner; then click "help"; then click "improper or illegal parking"; then scan the QR code of the vehicle, and upload photos. Reported vehicles show up on the map with a little diamond icon - meaning that if a user rents it and parks it properly at the end, they will get a discount on the rental fee.

I think the OneDulwich Twitter account was asked this in the past but declined to answer it. Perhaps the person operating the account missed the question. To be fair, there is a lot of rubbish on Twitter. Going back through the Twitter account, it looks like there's only ever been one person publicly associated with OneDulwich as its co-founder. That person is something of a frequent letter writer to the newspapers, sometimes on behalf of OneDulwich and separately on behalf of Dulwich Alliance. (OneDulwich has said it supports Dulwich Alliance's position, but presumably is not supposed to be the same as Dulwich Alliance). OneDulwich also claims to represent 1100 supporters... 🤔

Good luck, Matil. 👍

Sorry - "fake forum name" - I meant that practically all forum users (including me) use fake names to post on here. I probably could have explained that better - sorry for any confusion. I don't see why the comparison to Taxpayers Alliance is so upsetting. They're both groups that position themselves as speaking on behalf of large groups of people, that demand total transparency from others, and yet are not very forthcoming about their own funding and operation. Does OneDulwich actually have "members" at all?

That's interesting - but do you mean the app itself or just the website? I'm asking because reporting through the website is very cumbersome with lots of fields that need to be completed, while renting a bike through the app is in contrast very easy - just point and snap. I can't see a reporting function through the app - but maybe I don't have the latest version.

I happened to go down this stretch of Lordship Lane today. The rental bike space is outside the Dulwich Cafe, next to the charity shop, isn't it? The car parking spaces in front of the charity shop were filled with parked cars - like normal.

The remarkable thing about OneDulwich is that no-one has ever copped to being a member (even using a fake forum name) . Is it like the Taxpayers' Alliance?

To suggest that opponents of LTNs are being silenced is a weird kind of persecution complex, given that One Dulwich (and their proxies) have been banging on about this stuff for years, with leaflets, and posters, and banners, and a zillion threads each a hundred pages long on here. There was also an election that the Tory/OneDulwich candidate positioned as a referendum on LTNs...and a decisive result in favour of LTNs. The (cough) passions of the frequent flyers on here are not representative of wider reality. To be fair, you individually have always come across as entirely reasonable, fact-based and genuine.

I love a good conspiracy theory. Maybe Earl A has been sent by the World Economic Forum, the Masons or even more perfidious - Southwark Cyclists. How come the Bilderberg Group doesn't get blamed for stuff any more? They used to be all the rage.

This is just the repetitive data nihilism that he - I mean, OneDulwich - has pursued for years now: you can't prove this with data, or if you can prove it with data there isn't the data, or if the data exists then it isn't accurate, or if it is accurate then it's not the right data, or if it's the right data then there isn't enough of it, or if there is enough data then it's not analysed correctly... And this wibbling about requests for increasingly esoteric data from McCash is part of the same predictable playbook. It is an attempt to beat this dead data horse for more years. Whatever they are given, it won't be enough or it won't be right or they won't be printed in the right font. The data will never be enough to satisfy them because this tiny clique is not actually interested in the data.

This is exactly right. OneDulwich's tactic from the beginning has been to create FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) by madly banging out long and anonymous screeds of utter cobblers about data. There is no data that is good enough for him - I mean, them - because their objection is not to the data. The point is to drag you into their mire of nonsense. OneDulwich is Internet Reply Guy #6, the Sealion: https://twitter.com/i/events/1041376202391343104?lang=en And ultimately any data that doesn't fit their prejudices, they disregard:

I do use that path, but it's rubbish - it's narrow, uneven, and has several blind driveways. I understand why some wouldn't bother. I'm interested to hear how OneDulwich intends to reduce traffic and speed up buses on the South Circular. The (in their words) negligible revent growth in traffic shows it won't get better on its own. What is the solution that doesn't involve people driving less?

They've always been quite amenable to exemptions for residents - so I suppose you could say that they're in favour of other people driving less.

No, they haven't. It's all the same old claims.

One Dulwich and the Tories painted the last local elections as a referendum on LTNs. They got their arses handed to them. "we fully support the Council’s policies of reducing car use..." yeah, I bet the owner of the mansion next to Gail's with the seven cars parked on the drive and all the anti-LTN posters is really committed to that! 🤣🤣🤣

https://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/uploads/3/2/9/2/3292309/the-highway-code-road-traffic-signs.pdf 🤷‍♂️

See, the problem with this is that you've just made it up.