Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Apologies if this topic already posted. Transport for London have proposed creation of a PINK cycle superhighway (painted PINKin honour of the Lesbian threads , as the few cycle lanes around London have been painted blue for the Boris bikes) running from Penge to the City. Judging by the route on the map (here: [www.tfl.gov.uk]), the route runs all the way down Lordship Lane, Dog Kennel Hill, Denmark Hill, Camberwell Rd, Walworth Road. I think this is a great thing if it makes cycling into town from ED a bit safer. plus with the colour PINK being used it may well hide the blood when idiots take the Boris bikes out without a helmet


(Raises cycle hat to DJKQ for the concept)

Will the highway be that shade of pink though? I was hoping for something a bit less lurid.....not that I mind wearing pink lycra to match of course. And who knows how much money will be brought to local businesses from the pink pound along the route. I'm sure Kebab and Wine will be thrilled!
  • Administrator

The forum is run in way that tries to make it inclusive for everyone which is hard considering there are sometimes more than 4,000 users. It is meant to be fun and useful for the people of East Dulwich and I for one really do not appreciate people posting threads that, although tongue in cheek for some, are knowingly rude and offensive for others. It makes the Lounge, a part of the forum, a playground for a few and an unfriendly place to be for others. As it was put to be by by someone who cares about the forum they use "It doesn't reflect the general niceness of the forum and surely for outsiders looking in would wonder at the attitude of the website as a whole."


Please don't just take the p1ss out of others and think you can do what you want. Just because it is the Lounge does not mean it's ok be offensive, or that you have to ruin threads by going off topic, or have digs at the people who run it so that you can post.


Please keep the Lounge a good place to be for everyone, it's hard enough running the rest of the forum without suddenly realising the Lounge maybe descending into a unwelcoming playground.

  • Administrator
That's meant to be a polite reminder by the way, it's just there have been a few complaints recently and having looked around the Lounge (I hardly ever come in here) it seems it needs a bit of housekeeping, I don't want it to be a case that the lunatics are running the asylum.

I rather like the vaguely After Dark flavour of The Lounge.


'Catholic priest Father Michael Seed was quoted as saying: "I went on a programme called After Dark on Channel 4 once with a prostitute, a psychiatrist and a gay man. Afterwards they all started coming to see me"[12]...'



'Saturday night's talking point was the demon drug crack, a subject which would normally leave this viewer in a state of lacquered composure. Again, however, one's hackles soon rose and one was up there, punching the air, taking sides. Unfortunately the debate was hijacked by a black musician called 'Blue', who shouted everyone down with non-sequiturs. Eventually he got up and left...'



'Since you referred to the edition in which the late Oliver Reed took part, this seems a good time to correct some of the myths which have surrounded the programme since it was transmitted on 26 January 1991.


Although Reed was not the only disruptive guest in the history of After Dark, what put this particular show into the headlines was not so much Reed's behaviour as C4's. It took the show off the air for 20 minutes, filling the space with an old documentary about coal mining. When our programme returned, Reed was still on set and still disruptive.


That night Reed's behaviour was certainly causing concern. But neither the production team nor host Helena Kennedy felt the situation was out of control. Kennedy told us the guests could themselves decide whether and when to ask Reed to leave the set....'


Etc.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/After_Dark_%28TV_series%29

Admin...no-one is being offensive...sigh...can you give an example of knowingly rude (I am assuming it is this thread as you have targetted it specifically)....people have posts deleted...given reasons they don't agree with and then have no right to reply to the complainent. I personally think some poeple need to lighten up and stop making mountains out of molehills.


(Disclamier added to say this is just my view and intends no offence to anyone)


*waits for post to be deleted*

Problem with the Lounge is that it has a strange mixture of valid/useful stuff that just happens to fall outside of ED proper and then just random silliness. Regulars get the silliness, know the personalities and prob don't get offended even when some nonsense ends up in a 'serious' thread. But I guess non-regulars don't see the tongue-in-cheekness. Then again stupid posts can be irritating when it seems they are purely done for poster's humour in an otherwise sensible thread.


Perhaps we need a playground that is registered users only so as not to offend casual browsers where people can be as silly as they like

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

    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
    • Very sorry to hear this, but surely the landlord is responsible for fixing the electrics?  Surely they must be insured for things like this? I hope you get it all sorted out quickly.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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