Jump to content

Recommended Posts

HAL9000 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Ladymuck Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Crikey...completely different...how do we know

> > these are accurate?

>

> I've no idea how 'accurate' they are in terms of

> actual stabbings but these figures seem to make

> more sense (whatever that means) than those posted

> earlier.

>

> > Also, excuse my stupidity HAL9000, but what do

> you

> > mean when you say?

> >

> > I did these searches

> > again - properly:

> >

> > Search String Google

> > (using double quotes) (UK only)

>

> The search strings were enclosed in quotation

> marks (i.e. "double quotes") to limit the search

> to that exact phrase and Google was instructed to

> deliver only results from UK sources. None of the

> earlier searches were that precise.


a search like that certainly shows evidence of the number of hits on google if you 'do it properly'(?), but it doesn's show anything else

Seeing as this thread is about whether Peckham Rye was or was not a worse area than other areas, why not look here:


http://maps.police.uk/view/?q=se155dq&url=


It isn't explicit to stabbings but the number of crimes, makes for an interesting comparison if nothing else.

Exactly pk and stevebailey, one is random fact (google hits) and the other is a source of statistics....


It's like the Tories saying 'The no. of google hits for the word 'CRIME' has gone up exponentially since Labour has come into power.... :)


Edit to say that on my google search this link comes up on teh first page whereas i can't find anything on the actual stabbing this thread was orginially discussing.. what does that say????

R&A Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> It's like the Tories saying 'The no. of google

> hits for the word 'CRIME' has gone up

> exponentially since Labour has come into power....

> :)

>


it's not far off what they've done - using stats that official statisticians say should not be used for comparison purposes (due to different methods of collection) for comparison - then claiming crime increases where more reliable comparators show decreases!


and when this pointed out saying words to effect of 'well, we're going to keep using the comparisons anyway because they suit us'

Hi Jaws - I was on a bus at a standstill outside the 99p store at the time. Something was clearly going off ahead of us. Thankfully there was little evidence of it, apart from a taped off area of pavement, by the time we got moving again. I'd forgotten all about it until I saw this thread.


Horrible thing to have to witness - hope the playback is fading.

intexasatthe moment Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Lady muck - it was to do with quotation "marks "

> and double quotation ""marks "".


Whereas I was talking about 'single' and "double" quotation marks - see my personalised wiki page for details: Quotation Mark

HAL9000 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> intexasatthe moment Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Lady muck - it was to do with quotation "marks

> "


I will guess that our very own Hal is "the man" on the subject of quotation marks? - I know because I have seen it on the WWW:

Hal's bit on the Web about the Qmarks - can you spot "HAL" somewhere?


The man is the local genius - no doubt about it.

legalbeagle Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Good grief, when do you people sleep?!!


We don't (at least I don't)...hope you had a decent night though LB (hugs xx).




Mick Mac Wrote:

--------------------------------------------------------

>The man is the local genius...


Can artificial intelligence have gender?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Girls In Your City - No Selfie - Anonymous Casual Dating https://SecreLocal.com [url=https://SecreLocal.com] Girls In Your City [/url] - Anonymous Casual Dating - No Selfie New Girls [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/vanessa-100.html]Vanessa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/vanessa-100.html]Vanessa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/molly-15.html]Molly[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/cheryl-blossom-48.html]Cheryl Blossom[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/carola-conymegan-116.html]Carola Conymegan[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/pupa-41.html]Pupa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/mia-candy-43.html]Mia Candy[/url]
    • This is a remarkable interpretation of history. Wikipedia (with more footnotes and citations than you could shake a shitty stick at sez: The austerity programme was initiated in 2010 by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition government. In his June 2010 budget speech, Osborne identified two goals. The first was that the structural current budget deficit would be eliminated to "achieve [a] cyclically-adjusted current balance by the end of the rolling, five-year forecast period". The second was that national debt as a percentage of GDP would fall. The government intended to achieve both of its goals through substantial reductions in public expenditure.[21] This was to be achieved by a combination of public spending cuts and tax increases amounting to £110 billion.[26] Between 2010 and 2013, the Coalition government said that it had reduced public spending by £14.3 billion compared with 2009–10.[27] Growth remained low, while unemployment rose. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_government_austerity_programme From memory, last time around they were against the LTNs and competing with the Tories to pick up backlash votes - both failed. They had no counterproposals or ideas about how to manage congestion or pollution. This time around they're simply silent on the matter: https://www.southwark-libdems.org.uk/your-local-lib-dem-team/goosegreen Also, as we have seen from Mr Barber's comments on the new development on the old Jewsons yard, "leading campaigns to protect the character of East Dulwich and Goose Green" is code for "blocking new housing".
    • @Insuflo NO, please no, please don't encourage him to post more often! 😒
    • Revealing of what, exactly? I resurrected this thread, after a year, to highlight the foolishness of the OP’s op. And how posturing would be sagacity is quickly undermined by events, dear boy, events. The thread is about Mandelson. I knew he was a wrong ‘un all along, we all did; the Epstein shit just proves it. In reality, Kinnock, Blair, Brown, Starmer et all knew as well but accepted it, because they found him useful. As did a large proportion of the 2024 intake of Labour MPs who were personally vetted and approved by Mandelson.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...