Reg Smeeton

Yesterday evening a few children (in the age range 6 to 12) were happily playing on the pavements along Colwell Road. They had some pavement chalks and after producing a long, illustrated hopscotch grid they started a competition for who could produce the best pavement picture. Their artwork was really creative (flowers, mosaics etc). A few minutes later one of them knocked on the door to report that two community officers had come along and told them to remove these pictures as they are "graffiti". The disconsolate kids borrowed buckets and brooms and scrubbed away all of their artwork. It doesn't take much water to remove children's pavement chalk (indeed last night's rain would have been enough). But those children won't be engaging in that game again. Dear community officers, if you happen to be reading this, then I hope you realise just how misguided your enforcement was in this pathetic little incident. Perhaps you thought you've just nipped in the bud some potential future criminals, but instead you've killed off some spontaneous creative street play, the like of which hasn't been seen on East Dulwich streets since the 1950s (or so some threads tell us). Does anyone know what the law is regarding pavement chalk/hopscotch etc? UPDATE AT 2.30pm Rang the Community Wardens about this, they checked up and rang back. The situation seems to be that the law is vague - pavement chalking might be regarded as graffiti because it is writing on public land, even though it's temporary. But it's almost inconceivable that a child would even be cautioned for such a thing unless what they chalked was offensive. The wardens concerned won't challenge these children again (if they do, I'll be on the case immediately). Now, where can I buy some chalk...?

Anyone know what a Victoria Line driver earns? Think it's about ?40k. And, having sat in the cab once, it was interesting that the trains are operated automatically, the driver's responsibility is opening/closing doors and being there when a problem arises. Bit of a mind-numbing job, but very well remunerated. Strike sounds like it's cos they were bored.

To continue the Pink Floyd link, I shared an accountant with Roger Waters. His office was an anonymous building in Putney, paperwork everywhere, gold discs casually hung up around the walls. (The accountant had an interesting mix, 50% Roger Waters and 50% assorted freelancers, mainly musicians but he sometimes took on the occasional person with an 'interesting job' like me). Never got to meet the great Roger.

Brendan - I think the public image of chiropractic is that it is pretty mainstream (like a version of physiotherapy). That was certainly my impression until this case came up. The reality appears to be rather different. Do they conduct open, scientific research to support their claims? Do they allow the public to scrutinise their training programmes? No - instead their reputation is to respond to criticism by calling in the lawyers. If you do a google, you'll find the word 'cult' used to describe them (but not by me, oh no-sirree, just in case those lovely BCA people of impeccable standing are reading this, which they and their lawyers probably are). I'd say that makes chiropractic at least as 'alternative' as homeopathy. Brendan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Chiropractic may piss of some off the established > medical fraternity because it steps on what they > see as their turf but it is hardly ?alternative? > in the same sense as say, homeopathy.

I've just returned from a packed meeting in Holborn to hear about how the British Chiropractors Association are suing Simon Singh for claiming that they, to quote the original Guardian article, "happily promote bogus treatments". The judge in charge of the case has made an extraordinary and outrageous pre-trial ruling which effectively makes it impossible for Dr Singh to defend himself. You may not have heard about this story because none of the newspapers are covering it (for fear, it is said, that they too will be sued). It's a frightening case, because it is effectively denying free speech. Read about it on Jack of Kent's blog, and google elsewhere for more information. Anybody who believes in the freedom to put alternative medicine under the scientific spotlight should be worried. Britain's libel laws stink. http://jackofkent.blogspot.com/ The only mainstream, large circulation publication to have covered the story is the good old Economist: http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13643973

How about a shuttle bus from The Plough to Denmark Hill station? See this old thread. http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,6561,6898

Here is what the most recent Friends of Dulwich Park newsletter said: Jolly boating weather? The good news is that four operators are interested in offering boating on the lake. The council is assessing the applications and hopes to announce the operator by 30 April, in time for this year's boating season. There must be a risk that the appointed operator won't get things running till the summer is half gone, but better late than never, I guess.

Word has it this is Linda Barker's "other" place. Am I merely spreading an ubstantiated rumour here?

*Bob* Wrote: > > Taxpayer / Lottery = same thing The lottery is a voluntary tax on stupidity and greed. I'm all in favour of voluntary taxes, can we have some more Mr Darling?

...and today RBS shares hit 44p, quadrupling their price since January. Not a bad return on investment. Right, I'm selling...

What and where is DMC?

flapjackdavey Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Reg Smeeton Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Opening a book by Terry Pratchett and reading > any > > sentence at random. > > > > did you know the elephant shrew never closes its > eyes ? I did. And also that there is no proper name for the back of the knees. Now Vivien Stanshall WAS funny.

Opening a book by Terry Pratchett and reading any sentence at random.

Groundhog day

SimonM Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > >>MMM Simon I think i will let the great man > respond to you > Do you seriously think Parkinson came badly out of > that exchange? I was also the biggest fan of Ali > but that interview was unbearably sad. Almost as sad as the fact that Ali now (ironically) suffers from Parkinson's

AllforNun Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > " The question for this thread is value for money. > This is about the investment made by individuals, > and the return theyreceive. The evidence is that > the UK fee is lower than elsewhere, and it results > in a product that is demonstrably better than > elsewhere. " > > ER! what an earth are you wanging on about, moving > goal posts ? just do the math > > BBC 139.50 X 60million > Norway 214.00 X 4.5 Million > > so your point is what .. your point is just plain > SILLY. ! you make a program and you broadcast it > you do not need 15x the money to do that do you? > And there is nothing moronic about this website > you blinkered old goat ! try @#$%& making a > comment on the BBC website, come on chop chop, you > will be scrutinized, asked for all your personal > details before you even get to post. I am getting > a bit tired of your frankly STUPID and half baked > responses, if you want to get into to it do your > research properly, every @#$%& time i have to > respond to your NONSENSE i have to interupt a > download of my favourite afternoon movie, i have > broken the link to "COME IN MY BACKDOOR IV" twice > already today. and as for "your envy, indolence > and bitterness you couldn't create yourself" i > have @#$%& created it myself as they have been > robbing me for 40+ years ! AFN, you aren't Nulwich Noll in disguise are you? I'm getting feelings of deja vu. Personally I'd still think BBC was good value if all it had was Radio 4. I bet I wouldn't enjoy Norway's equivalent a tenth as much, especially since I don't speak Norwegian.

They say the darkest part of the night is just before the dawn. (Though I've noticed that sometimes the darkest part is at 2am, and other times it's 11pm....)

I see the dog-fouling thread has been locked, and I say good riddance to a thoroughly foul thread. Of course there are now two meta-dog foul threads on the loose including this one, so I hope these now wither on the vine. (I realise I'm not helping it to wither by posting on the thread, but I promise not to post on here again - and please resist the urge to respond to this post!)

Lordship lame.

If there's a bullying clique then either (a) they're all out at the EDF Drinks night right now having their cliquey drink, or (b) they're all logged on now cliquily chatting to each other on this thread. But you know what, I kinda think maybe it's actually ©. The dog-fouling thread is the most dismal I've seen on the forum for a while, and anyone who cares about the EDF should just stop posting on it altogether.

Poppylucky obviously doesn't get much sleep as (s)he usually makes these hallucinatory posts at 4.33am.

Don't worry KK, I'm not sure I get it either. Reg

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Reg...what have you done....David Beckham > described as "The iconic David Beckahm tonight" on > ITV I know, I know, and on The Apprentice tonight the blokes were serving food in the iconic gherkin, or so Rocky said. What we need is some iconoclasm.

RosieH Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Reg, are you actually Jonathan Meades? No, though I see he does use the word 'literally' in his article.

One man's fish is another man's poisson.