Jump to content

Recommended Posts

paulipedia Wrote:

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

> If you go to the park don't walk on the path.

> Simple


Could you be a bit more vague please?


As a rule, pedestrians always have right of way, even on a highway (within reason for a highway). 'Pedestrian' does not cover joggers, runners, cyclists etc.

paulipedia Wrote:

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

> You want me to spell it out. OK. Dulwich Park and

> most other parks have a path/road that

> circumnavigates the park. Walk on the grass not on

> the pathway therefore not near anyone. Most people

> aren't doing this.



So the people that walked on the pathway are now all walking together on the grass.

paulipedia Wrote:

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

> You want me to spell it out. OK. Dulwich Park and

> most other parks have a path/road that

> circumnavigates the park. Walk on the grass not on

> the pathway therefore not near anyone. Most people

> aren't doing this.


I dont want to walk on the grass because of the dog mess and also I'm badly allergic to wasps and they often buzz around low around grass.

No what makes sense is what an earlier poster said.

Joggers use the bridleway and walkers use the pavements and other paths to walk in.

I object strongly to your suggestion that all walkers should walk on the grass because Joggers should have right of way.

Smells trollish to me

paulipedia - to suggest all tarmac covered surfaces (roads, pavement, paths connecting different areas of park) should be for joggers only is not reasonable. Basically you?re saying Dulwich Park is a sports ground but if you want to walk or go with family then must mind you don?t get in the way of the runners as they have priority.

Doesn?t sound like a serious suggestion, or option.

How about don't take your dogs? Therefore no dog mess,no dogs dragging their owners too close to other people,no dog owners flouting the lockdown rules by taking their dogs out several times a day. Studies have implicated dogs in the spread of this virus, seems like heaping Pelion on Ossa, risk-wise.


That's a simple proposal everyone can follow, and would be very effective.

KidKruger Wrote:

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

> paulipedia - to suggest all tarmac covered

> surfaces (roads, pavement, paths connecting

> different areas of park) should be for joggers

> only is not reasonable. Basically you?re saying

> Dulwich Park is a sports ground but if you want to

> walk or go with family then must mind you don?t

> get in the way of the runners as they have

> priority.

> Doesn?t sound like a serious suggestion, or

> option.

This

I?m not suggesting all joggers have right of way on pavements. My observation is that most parks I?ve been to people are sticking to the paths and leaving a lot of space. If you want to minimise your risk of infection go where there aren?t people. Wow

Out this morning every single or pair of joggers skirted right round me or crossed the road well in advance, and each time I thanked them for it.


Only one guy forced me to wait in the middle of a pedestrian crossing, so we would not meet on the pavement I was crossing over to and he was running on. He could have detoured into the grass area but chose not to. He thanked me for waiting though. I think runner fatigue can clearly sometimes interfere with judgement!

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

    • Having enjoyed a day with Sayce HolmesLewis, I understand what you’re saying.  I appreciate your courage responding on here. 
    • Thank you to everyone who has already shared their thoughts on this. Dawson Heights Estate in the 1980s, while not as infamous as some other estates, did have its share of anti-social behaviour and petty crime. My brother often used the estate as a shortcut when coming home from his girlfriend’s house, despite my parents warning him many times to avoid it. Policing during that era had a distinctly “tough on crime” approach. Teenagers, particularly those from working-class areas or minority communities, were routinely stopped, questioned, and in some cases, physically handled for minor infractions like loitering, skateboarding, or underage drinking. Respect for authority wasn’t just expected—it was demanded. Talking back to a police officer could escalate a situation very quickly, often with harsh consequences. This was a very different time. There were no body cameras, dash cams, or social media to hold anyone accountable or to provide a record of encounters. Policing was far more physical and immediate, with few technological safeguards to check officer behaviour. My brother wasn’t known to the police. He held a full-time job at the Army and Navy store in Lewisham and had recently been accepted into the army. Yet, on that night, he ran—not because he was guilty of anything—but because he knew exactly what would happen if he were caught on an estate late at night with a group of other boys. He was scared, and rightfully so.
    • I'm sure many people would look to see if someone needed help, and if so would do something about it, and at least phone the police if necessary if they didn't feel confident helping directly. At least I hope so. I'm sorry you don't feel safe, but surely ED isn't any less safe than most places. It's hardly a hotbed of crime, it's just that people don't post on here if nothing has happened! And before that, there were no highwaymen,  or any murders at all .... In what way exactly have we become "a soft apologetic society", whatever that means?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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