Dogkennelhillbilly

Jess_mw Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It's > all about responsible dog ownership and training > though, no need to hate on the breeds... Obviously responsibility begins and ends with the owners. A dog is a dog. Is it responsible dog ownership to buy a large, strong dog that's wary of strangers when you live in a busy London suburb with small (if you're lucky) Gardens?

Scrutinising data is fine. It's the barrack room statistifying based on speculation, "common sense" and cobblers, then wondering why it's "confusing" that was unhelpful. The "disagreeing with definition of trip because it doesn't suit my prejudices" was just one example of that.

heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > independents on the Lane... now there is only one > I would recommend. Go on, then! ;)

Angelina Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I am going to miss the forum for conversations > such as this If I can't waste my time bickering about traffic with monomaniacs, I'll probably just have to go back to curing cancer or bringing peace to the Middle East or something...

heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Maybe kids who travel actively or by PT pay lower > fees than those chauffeured to school in the > Porsche Cayenne or the BMW X7... in these times I > find spending 100 grand on a car pretty > disgusting, especially when parked illegally on > EDG with the engine running.. On one hand, it's just not true that "Dulwich traffic is just private schoolkids' fault". (Heartblock - not saying you say this- just saying that this exists as a meme). It's not just schoolkids, and it's not just private schoolkids. On the other hand, I have zero sympathy for people who have 15 grand a year for school fees and 70 grand for a big diesel SUV, but buying a cargo bike for the school run or paying a childminder to take the kid on the bus is just too, too expensive... (To be fair, there may not be a large number of these people, but they're the most obvious example of everything that's wrong...)

Pret's coffee is milky shite, their pastries are soggy, and their sandwiches have gone to pot. They'll be a smash

Can we run solar panels off all this gaslight? Because we will have solved the energy crisis if so.

I dunno if I'd go as far as Gregg's but I wouldn't mind a Proper English bakery like Ayres Bakery in Nunhead. I like Boulangerie Jade but sometimes you want something a bit heftier for lunch.

KateFord Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Looks like there was an accident yesterday. So > really needs to be looked into before there is a > fatality. Oh jeez, poor kid. Hope they're well. I passed by this spot the other day and agree they're a bit indistinct. Don't think you could have a raised crossing here because of the frequent buses...?

Spartacus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > But like the masons, the cyclists tend to have one > trouser leg rolled up to protect it from the chain > oil and all have a secret hand shake (although in > the cyclists case it seems to be a moving "O"aimed > at car drivers) Top 10 joke on EDF - instant hall of fame status! 🤣🤣🤣

Spartacus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So much negativity towards new businesses on > Lordship Lane. Pret and Megan's aren't plucky little startups, their feelings won't be hurt. I don't want the reasonable mix of independents and small chains we have to be driven out by better-financed chain stores.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ?Sheeple? 🤣😂 "?Sheeple?, a portmanteau of sheep and people, is the term conspiracy theorists use about the rest of the population, those who they consider passively credulous..." https://www.economist.com/1843/2020/09/17/from-plandemic-to-breadcrumbs-conspiracy-theory-slang There has been plenty of conspiracy theorising on this thread, not least a suggestion that the Southwark Cyclists were secretly more powerful than the Masons and the Bilderberg Group combined...

ab29 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Majority of people in Dulwich want LTN removed > according to the council's own consultation The consultation was open to everyone with an Internet connection and an opinion, not just Dulwich residents. People that aren't bothered about something don't tend to engage in consultations about that thing. Only on some streets did more than 25% of residents even reply. A consultation is not a vote.

Diane Abbott wouldn't like to associate herself with anyone that had got into trouble sith the police... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-34244370

heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "Traffic has been rising across Southwark since > the end of the 2021 COVID-19 lockdown" Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > the reduction in traffic 🤔🤣🤣🤣

Brideshead Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > residents next door saw no gas van, > tradesman, or any van or were not issued with any > safety warning (suspected gas leaks lead to whole > street evacuations)ON THAT THURSDAY EVENING OR > FRIDAY MORNING I'd lay off this bit - it makes you sound like some kind of loopy case that's been watching the outside of the pub through a telescope while hidden in the chicken shop's wheelie bin.

apbremer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I cannot believe that voters have been so stupid. > In DV ward they voted overwhelmingly to rid > themselves of these wretched LTNs... No. The public consultation was not a vote. It also wasn't restricted to people who live in the area. Anyone with an opinion and an Internet connection could participate - just like this forum, in fact! And just like this forum, the results of the consultation were not reflective of the real world.

rachp Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Agree, my experience of the food in DV was > underwhelming, and I?ve never been back. Hopefully > they will up their game. I went to Megan's and thought the food was alright (humus and halloumi and bread is what I like, tbf) but JFC it was expensive and not huge portions...

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What's the relevance of the "hipster entrepreneurs > who run gender-neutral kids' clothing firm" > headline exactly? It generates interaction, which is what counts. Unfortunately, nasty interaction counts just as much as nice interaction, and is easier to provoke.

diable rouge Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > As Tory MP for Wimbledon, Stephen Hammond, said > this morning, angry Tory voters didn't just stay > at home and not vote as many people thought they > would, they actually came out and voted against > the Tory party. Or maybe the Tories are just discovering what Labour discoverer a few years ago: that there basically aren't any party-loyal voters any more. The membership of the Tory party is tiny and (iirc) its average age is in the 60s or possibly 70s. The rest of the electorate is up for grabs and every vote needs to be fought for on every front. Sometimes that means you pull off unexpected coups - like smashing the "red wall". And sometimes that means you lose in places that traditionally would be a shoo-in...if Dulwich Village (the wealthy, leafy home of 80s Thatcherite stockbrockerism) doesn't vote Tory - where will?

ab29 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Rockets, I have no illusions - four more years of > arrogance and not listening to constituents. Your mistake here is confusing the fact that you didn't get your way with the idea that the councillors aren't listening to constituents. There is a point at which you just have to accept something and move on. Maybe today is that day for you - or maybe not. You have complained that Southwark is a one party state - immediately after a hotly contested multiparty election. Please spend some time in Asmara or Pyongyang before trotting out this tired line of moaning.

Litter in the playpark is 90% a result of careless parents not cleaning up after their kids (and it wouldn't kill anyone to pick up a couple of pieces of other people's rubbish when they see it), and foxes raiding bins overnight.

goldilocks Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Comments about how people are looking for things > to be offended at are bizarre in the face of what > he said! > > Tristan?s comments were unacceptable but it?s just > one example of how the anti LTN campaigners > (Conservatives , Dulwich Alliance - though they?re > essentially one and the same as Clive Rates > founded the Dulwich Alliance) make offensive > comments to further divide. Like this from one of > their spokespeople: > > https://i.imgur.com/l9TO8tx.png The Tory/Dulwich Alliance candidate is comparing his own bugbear to the events of 9/11 and Stalinist occupation of Germany. It's completely bonkers. The hysterical bleating by some on here about Southwark being a "one party state" is in a similar vein - rhetoric that's offensive to people who actually suffered under one party states. All of this language is completely disproportionate to what is - as a reminder - a disagreement about whether a couple of junctions in suburban London are open or closed at rush hour. But of course this is happy turf for Johnson's Tory party - if you can incite a culture war by using inflammatory terms like "bumboys" and "letterboxes", you can shift attention away from uncomfortable topics like backhanders from developers, hundreds of millions of pounds spent through the "VIP hotline" for Tory donors, woeful mismanagement of COVID, austerity, Brexit, the affordable housing crisis, the choking of TfL and so much more...

Not sure quite as much of the universe revolves around the East Dulwich Forum as you're suggesting tbh

rachp Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I can?t believe people > that represent household name companies like > Deliveroo, can behave like this Deliveroo is a pretty "aggressive" company to begin with. The riders are not employees (because then they'd be entitled to a wage - the horror!) so just about anyone can sign up to be exploited if they have a pulse, a phone and a bike. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/jun/24/deliveroo-riders-suffer-setback-in-court-battle-for-right-to-unionise