EDguy89

Probably a scam. If there's genuinely an issue you should search for the # independently of the one provided.

I mean you don't have anything to prove that bunting = more sales. All you have is your assumptions and at best an anecdote or two. Unless you'd like to present your data i'll just go along assuming that you're just whining about trivial nonsense.

https://paulbigland.blog/2022/03/10/the-end-of-the-line-beckons-southerns-br-built-class-455s/ They've retired the older trains that normally come through ED. My general opinion is that Southern just didn't adequately prepare for the retirement of their old models by making sure they have sufficient carriages of the replacements. Prior to the new trains, I would always walk to the end of the platform because the carriages were less populated and there was much more room. Even a few weeks back when there were issues at ED station with the whole "Front 7 carriages only" the 8th still opened up and functioned as it normally would. So why that happened, I have no idea. If it were a matter of retiring the older trains for the sake of the environment I'd be fine with the reduced number of carriages. I don't think that's the case, though...

There's a book you can purchase that acts as a study guide for this test. They publish the prior years version for free so I opted to just use the free one because I figured the difference between the 2020 and the 2021 version were minimal. Especially since the closest we get to anything modern is around 2012. The kicker about this test is you gotta pass it before you're able to apply for indefinite leave to remain or citizenship. It's run through a third party company and it costs ?50 a go. If you fail they don't tell you how many you had gotten wrong, or which questions. Just that you failed. As a native English speaker it wasn't too bad, but I imagine this is a very frustrating quiz for people where English isn't their first language.

I had to take this test recently. Fortunately I passed (Not sure by how much. They don't tell you your score whether your pass or fail) A lot of it isn't really practical information that would be used daily. Knowing the name of the court for youths in Scotland isn't totally relevant for an adult living in London. Nor what Gertrude Jekyll is famous for. I remember thinking as I was studying that the infinitely more relevant things would be along the lines of "Who campaigned to continue school meals throughout the COVID-19 pandemic?" You can give them a go here: https://lifeintheuktests.co.uk/life-in-the-uk-test/

Nigello Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Shows promise but needs work. Perhaps there is an > afterschool comedy club that could help...? Excuse me? Have you backed down from your crusade? Where'd your spine go? Publicly funded buildings should never advertise anything, ever. I don't care if children are starving in the streets and dying of scurvy. If a school has a program to help feed them, they need to keep that to themselves. Or better yet, social media. Which platform? I don't need to do their work for them. The two words "Social" and "Media" should be enough for them to figure it out. But yes, in your words Nigello, these buildings have been "obliterated" by this blight on our society. It's as good as a declaration of war, in my opinion. It seems Tooley Street isn't inclined to do anything about it either so we'll need to take to the streets ourselves. Do you hear the people sing? Singing the songs of angry men. It is the music of the people who will not be slaves again! When the beating of your heart echoes the beating of the drum! There is a life about to start when Nigello comes!

"Obliterating generations-old buildings"....hmmm..last time I checked, that word is useful in situations where something has been completely destroyed. You sure you haven't confused this school with buildings in the Ukraine? Cause THAT would constitute the word "obliterate". But you're right, this is a travesty. The head teacher should be strung up, tarred and feathered. Lawlessness of this level should never be tolerated and I expect the Crown Court to review this matter! We should not stand by while innocent flower beds, railings, and architecture, ALL PUBLICLY FUNDED MIND YOU, suffer this literal holocaust. The fact that no one other than Nigello sees the crimes against humanity here speaks to just how blinded East Dulwich has become by their pampered lifestyles. A quote comes to mind: "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing". First, after school activities, then what? School fairs? CAR BOOT SALES? HAVE YOU ALL NO SHAME?!

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Havent seen what Boris has said today. But overall > it does feel that the complete lack of leadership > coming from the US President at present has > created something of a vacuum, and the result (at > least from a laymans perspective) seems to be a > pretty disjointed 'front' from the west. > > You have the EU saying and doing some things, Nato > saying and doing other things, the UN making > pointless symbolic resolutions, Macron going off > trying to be a hero unilaterally, Boris doing > whatever boris does, plus various other world > leaders chipping in from time to time.... > > Perhaps this is how these things always are, but > in the past the US repoinse has dominated the news > cycle so its less noticeable what other > bodies/nations are doing and saying.... > > In the ansence of a domina nt US voice in global > affairs, it doesn make everyone else in the 'west' > look a bit like a pen of headless chickens.... Fortunately for the west Biden won the election. Trump is well documented to be a Putin fanboy and likely would have caused much more trouble in this situation had he won. If you're concern is leadership than you should be thankful for the actions taken by the Biden administration because the alternative would have created an actual pen of headless chickens rather than your perceived one.

We need to find this woman and hang her for this most heinous transgression.

For future reference, the rail replacement for ED station is on East Dulwich Grove. Going towards London Bridge, the stop is Stop U on the corner of EDG and Derwent Grove. Going south towards everywhere else, it's Stop C opposite of the Tess Jowell Health Centre.

Nah you're making too broad of statements. I wouldn't go after Southall Black Sisters nor Mermaids. Why? Because they're marginalised groups. And yes, more marginalised than women on the whole (ESPECIALLY mermaids since you seem to believe that trans people don't exist. Yet you bring them up to defend your point? Despicable). You think your group are a bunch of victims. You paint yourself that way, quite literally, in those pictures you posted. Some meak, weak little person piping up and putting themselves out there just to be beaten down by people mindless screaming about terfs? PLEASE. You put up this innocent little facade of "I'm just sticking up for women" yet time and time again you fail to refer to transwomen as what they are, women. You are literally just as bad as the "other" that you depict in your little pictures. You see everything in such a binary way that it's probably impossible for you to see this as anything other than man v woman because that's the only thing you've ever seen. I've taken a good look at myself plenty of times and at the end of the day I look just fine. The fact that you still go on about "white middle aged man" when you, time and time again, deny a person's existence. But yeah, tell me about how I'm a bully. I advocate for women and girls myself, too, but unlike you I don't draw the arbitrary line at "had to be born with a vagina". Tell yourself how strong and courageous you are all you want, at the end of the day you're still wrong. Get used to it.

oimissus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Everyone still sure Hubbard beat Manumua fair and > square, because she wasn't good enough? Yes because Hubbard placed 7th and Manumua placed 14th. Lots of other people got in Manumua's way. Should have lifted harder. Also, going back to your bit about 99% of conversations boiling down to those few reasons, the whole ""A woman (usually) is speaking up for women only, and excluding men! Shut her up!" (this one never aimed at any other group who organize for themselves)" is why you're a transphobe. It doesn't have to do with sticking up for women. You're exlcuding transwomen because in your limited worldview you refuse to see them as anyone other than a man parading around as a woman. Cisgendered women rightfully should be elevated in our communities, but it doesn't mean that transwomen or transmen need to be beaten down as you think is fit to do. You're more exclusive than inclusive.

And on the concept of "hate", real quick. The seeds of fear that you sow about changing rooms. The utter terror about the prospect of someone preying on another does one thing and one thing alone: leads directly to hate. So don't go playing the "everyone hates women" card when, in your case, you're very much guilty of hating trans people. Again, trans people exist. Laurel Hubbard is a woman.

Your entire point about changing rooms is so tired. Do you honestly believe that transwomen transitioned solely to pray on cisgendered women in changing rooms? Do you really think that's the pinnacle of what transitioning is all about. Look, if a man wanted to go into a changing room and sexually assault women, transitioning to a woman is a really roundabout way of doing it. The reality that you reject is that people can transition. We talk and talk about men faking transitions to women for nefarious purposes, but if the reason people transition is to assault women, then why do women transition to be men? Why do transmen exist? Is it because that's the only way for women to sexually assault men in a changing room? Probably not. Again, the reality is that people transition because they, in themselves, are not a man for example. If biology is the sole factor of determining gender, then what happens when a woman has a hysterectomy? The parts are gone, so therefore she isn't a woman? Sounds wrong. Or, if I lost my penis in an accident, would I no longer be a man? Nah, probably not. The parts you were born with are not prescriptive of who you are as a woman. I think you'd be hard pressed to find that people who advocate for trans rights would advocate against woman's rights. Feminism as a concept exists to get all people to the same level. Of course people exist who just want to stomp on terfs, but likewise, as is with the case with you. There are people who exist who refuse to believe that transwomen or transmen exist. And in that regard, you might as well be stomping on them.

oimissus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hubbard has done nothing to earn my respect, in > fact he's done everything possible to lose it. So > he doesn't get it. I couldn't care less what he's > done to himself in terms of medication and surgery > - a man who takes hormones and has surgery is > still a man. If that man is a decent person I > might go along with his delusion to make him feel > better about himself. But this man? No. You're trash. Your beliefs are trash. Hubbard is not a man and your refusal to refer to her as "she" is indicative of your disgusting transphobia. Likely also indicative of your disgusting personality. You're not a hero. You're not some brave soul standing up for something. The "people" DMing you and thanking you for this? They're just as bad as you are, but they're also cowards. That is, if these DMs even existed in the first place. Trash tends to ooze lots of foul-smelling nonsense. Nini didn't qualify because she wasn't good enough. Plain and simple. Hubbard also likely won't win any medals at the olympics because she isn't as good as the top contenders. Surely if trans women were so dangerous Hubbard would win gold every time, right? Since that IS the argument. Trans women are just built different, aren't they? Better than cisgendered women in every way, shape, and form. Oh wait, but Hubbard ISN'T number 1. Because all that garbage ISN'T TRUE. We shouldn't have to sit here and tolerate your intolerance. In the same way that your refuse to refer to Hubbard as a woman, I'll make sure to come back to this thread over and over to refuse to refer to you as "human". I'll use "trash" in human's stead. That's not a really nice thing to do, is it? Especially since you'd probably refer to yourself as a human. Time to determine whether you're "human" or "trash". Do the right thing (and it is the right thing) and call Hubbard a she. Because she is a woman despite your protest.

T.Aurora Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Errrr I think might have missed my point a bit - > we were enjoying our garden, it wasn?t too loud, > it wasn?t late, and hadn?t been going on too long. > You?ve got to expect some give and take if you > live in London. We put up with noise all the time Did anyone come over and ask you turn down the music before registering a complaint? I figure it's unlikely you'd have a speaker capable of making noise loud enough to warrant a complaint. Music in a garden at a very reasonable time in the evening on a weekend isn't complaint-worthy.

Oof. "All Streets Matter" Really not a sympathetic slogan. They should really reconsider if they're actually interested in getting more support.

garages2018 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Too many scooters around Lordship lane waiting to > deliver food. > Possible to do with delivery area's It's common knowledge that the NLL Boys (North Lordship Lane) have a strong association with all takeaways north of the Co-op and that the Southside Riders have been working GBK, Spinach, and Yamamomo pretty hard in the recent weeks. My understand, per my sources, is that they've had a truce since the pandemic started. They're not the sort to break their word and weren't involved in this crime, so best to not jump to too many conclusions.

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It's fascinating to me that many of the people who > often protest loudly about the need to 'educate > yourself' about racism are the same people who are > dismissing the Sewell report without even > bothering reading it, on the basis on cherry > picked soundbites and mis-represnted excerpts > they've read in the Guardian or on social > media.... > > I had a social media 'debate' today with a number > of people who are calling it a disgrace. As it > happens, Ive actually read most of it....not one > of them had even opened it..... So I haven't read all 258 pages, but i've read some of it and I think the section "Perceptions and Realities" is a good starting point to see what the report says and see if there's any credibility to the people who disagree with it I'll quickly paraphrase the section: -The first argument is that media and social media amplifies the perception that racism is on the rise -A think tank found that 13% of white people experienced racist or prejudiced insults online compared to 19% for those who are Pakistani and 22% for those who are black -Police recorded hate crimes increased 131% in 9 years, but they claim it's due to more broad definitions of hate crime and better reporting -Crime Survey for England and Wales, often considered more reliable, has seen a decrease in hate crimes by 45k compared from 2010-2012 to 2018-2020 -The perception of racism exists also in part of COVID due to black and south asian people living generally in higher density, urban areas with more levels of deprivation, work in higher risk jobs, and live with older more vulnerable relatives - "if it were true that Black and South Asian groups were suffering from systemic racism throughout their lives" then we would see a higher mortality rate because the quality of life would be lower (education, health, income, housing, and employment) -However, mortality rates for Black and South Asian groups were lower when all causes of death were considered and "data for Scotland suggests Asian ethnic groups groups have higher life expectancy than White ethnic groups." -----I'll return to this point later -Instead of focusing on race and ethnicity, they suggest focusing on underlying risk factors (socio-economic) -They ponder why it is that while situations have improved for ethnic minority groups, why public perception is that nothing's changed -The quote Sunder Katwala - essentially saying that academics, media, and political environments are overplaying racism as it isn't the lived experience for most people and that we need to hear more from people who "just get on with their everyday lives and are not defined by race" -The finish up by suggesting that these pessimistic narratives in media help form a negative view on a matter that they show has improved. They're not happy with Lobbying groups that do some good things, but emphasize lived experiences "with less emphasis on objective data" A bit lengthy, I know. That's a pretty objective retelling of what they claim in that section. If you don't think that's right I'd suggest you go read it and tell me what was wrong. So now, why is it that people can look at this report questionably? What's questionable in that synopsis? I think the bit about the increase in hate crimes recorded by the police then contradicting that statement with the bit from the thinktank isn't helpful. They make excuses for why the police figures have increased, but then talk about how the thinktank data is seen as more reliable. So if it's the most reliable why did they include the police then attempt to discredit it? Why bother making excuses for the increase if it's not credible? I think they contradict themselves a lot when they're talking about Black/South Asian communities being more likely to die from COVID due to their work, their living standards, environment, and who they live with. They later talk about bit that I said I'd return to. They say Black/South Asian mortality is lower than white mortality, despite Black/South Asian people living in the more deprived communities in general. So, they're admitting that the people who they say are most impacted by the soci-economic issues they're wanting to address are Black/South Asian people. Why not just say it? The other issue with that part is that they do reference two separate papers for Black/South Asian death causes from all sources and then the Scottish report about white people having lower life expectancy rates. I feel this bit is pretty cherry picked because the statement about "less death dates from all causes for Black/South Asian" comes from this report: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/908434/Disparities_in_the_risk_and_outcomes_of_COVID_August_2020_update.pdf but that same paper says "Black males were 3.9 times more likely to die than the White group, compared with 2.5 times in Asian males. Among females, death rates were 3.3 times higher in the Black ethnic group, and 2.3 times higher in the Asian ethnic group than the White group." ---Ok, so? Well they followed that bit up with the statement from the Scottish report that White people have a shorter life expectancy. There's no link to that report and it's 5 years old at this point. Is it really acceptable to compare a report on deaths during a pandemic to a report about life expectancy from a time before COVID? Surely those life expectancy rates would have shifted in 5 years? Even if they haven't, with a pandemic they really should comparing like for like. Plus, you're also comparing death rates in the entirety of England to life expectancy in Scotland. They're not the same. Then my last bit since I'm going on and on and on is about the quote from Sunder Katwala - The bit about needing to hear from regular folk whose lives aren't defined by racism. Who would that be? People like me. White people. We're not defined by racism because WE ARE the societal norm. White people are the baseline in life. We don't need to hear from regular white folk when it comes to talks about racism. We need to listen more than we talk. So yeah, that section alone is questionable, plus they don't even bring up things like stop and searches with this nice bit from a report published in Feb 2021: https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/crime-justice-and-the-law/policing/stop-and-search/latest#by-ethnicity "there were 6 stop and searches for every 1,000 White people, compared with 54 for every 1,000 Black people" But yeah, they also have the audacity to say IF when they're talking about systemic racism. IF. Systemic racism is real.

We really should be treating April Fools jokes more seriously as any EDF user who didn't know the date likely just suffered a rage-induced aneurysm.

I'm not a homeowner, I don't have a garden, I don't own a car, and I don't cycle. I live on Melbourne Grove, and the rhetoric regarding people who live on these streets on the forum is utterly insane. "just car parks for the rich" - You do know there is a council housing estate right on Melbourne Grove, right? "I haven't seen a single child playing on closed off Melbourne Grove" - And why would you? Bikes, motor bikes, and cars still make use of the road. I've got a child, and despite not owning a garden, I wouldn't let them go and play on the road. However, you would be happy to know that a local group of kids use the corner of Melbourne and Chesterfield frequently for skateboarding. I get that LTNs are such a massively charged subject, and a lot of people get very passionate about it. At least with Melbourne Grove (I can't speak for other roads), I'd like to see less assumptions being made about the sort of people living on these streets. You must remember that the majority of people are just living their lives and aren't as rich as imagined.

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Didn?t see it but I?m wondering why many are > assuming the question of the colour of the baby?s > skin was racist. > > The concern might have been what the baby would > look like with ginger hair against possible shades > of skin. > > 😬 "I haven't seen it, but let me tell you how this black person misunderstood racism" Also, if the concern was actually hair colour, then they would have said "I'm concerned about the child's hair colour". You'd likely win gold at the Olympics with that gymnastics routine.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Went to the New Co-op today.. Very Nice... > > However one aisle has a big bucket with *** > Warning *** Wet Floor. > So keeping up with the Tradition of having leaks > (Through the Ceiling ??) > > I'll give it 3 months before it gets back to > normal. > > Foxy I'm completely unsurprised that your biggest takeaway from the new fit out of the shop is there's a wet floor sign. I imagine you were only saying you couldn't wait to for the Co-op to reopen just so you can whinge about it. The new fit out is very nice. Much more spacious at the front of the shop. The rearrangement of the floor seems to have given them more shelf space as there's products there I haven't seen before. Good effort overall and nice work done by those who carried out the refitting.

lousmith Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > EDguy89 It would make sense to agree to a > temporary structure to be erected in the garden of > a property with a 100+ year lease as it could > always be removed. The garden is owned by the > freeholder though and that is the issue here. The > fact that the other leaseholder has done and > continues to do far more in the way of actual > structural alterations and actual law of the land > breaking without suffering any such blowback is > what's eating me up here. If it was an isolated > incident of I broke the rules, I got caught, then > I would go quietly. Unfairness on this level > though, I just can't stomach. Ok, so essentially it boils down to you did something you shouldn't, but feel that you shouldn't rectify that issue as long as the other tenant who has also done something they shouldn't doesn't face any consequences?

So I guess I'm curious. Does the freeholder's say outweigh the leaseholder in every instance? I rent, and I know I'm not able to make changes to the property as its not owned by myself. Does the same hold true if you have a 100 year lease? I imagine you wouldn't be able to add an extension to the back of the house or anything like that since eventually the lease would end and the property/land would revert back to the freeholder. I imagine you'd need the freeholder's permission for that first. I'd figure the same would be true for a building added in the garden. Or is this incorrect?