Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Very loathe to blame mothers for this as well as everything else, but, I just wonder if anyone can remember exactly when it became The Norm to sally out without a hankie and spray snot and germs over everyone within snot-projectile distance?


And to teach your kiddies that this is what we do.


Okay, this is specificaly for the Dulwich mummy lady who was in Maceys chemist last Thurs with the sweet little blonde moppet who was so poorly he was howling - you know, the one with the terrible cough. The one who was spreading that cough to everyone else in the chemists. The expensively-dressed one with an expensively-dressed mother, who, however, was apparently too strapped to buy a packet of paper hankies.


How comes it, that people are obsessed beyond reason with the make of their kitchen, their pots and pans, shoes and their holiday destinations, yet they are quite willing to spray plaguey germy snot over everyone around them? Does it not occur that this detracts a little from the glow?


Can they not form the faintest idea that some of the people they snot-spray might be recovering or trying to recover from cancer, or leukemia, and could be sent back into hospital? Or an average healthy person could miss a week off work or getting a freelance contact that could affect their whole year?


Community snot wardens I will approve of.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/3107-plague-mummies/
Share on other sites

Snot unusual to be loved by anyone... badabadabadaaa....


Poor snoozequeen, sorry to hear you're not well especially if it means you have missed out on work, that sucks.


Is it really the norm that kids are let loose on ED streaming with plague and without tissues? If this is the case, I will be withdrawing into Castle Moos immediately and pulling up the drawbridge behind me.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/3107-plague-mummies/#findComment-96386
Share on other sites

I suppose political comment is exempt.


Worked recently with people planning for service provision in pandemic. Govt estimates min 30%, max 60% population "taken out" (lovely phrase) but I never asked if that was based on a handkerchief-using sample or not. If not, house prices would certainly be coming down, to about 13th century levels I would guess. Would be quite peaceful down Lordship Lane.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/3107-plague-mummies/#findComment-96696
Share on other sites

macroban Wrote:

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

> Don't worry, it's all in hand.


Oh that's so reassuring, thanks.


Suppose a generation of adults that is so daft it can't carry or use hankies is bound to be culled by something. It's a wonder we got this far.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/3107-plague-mummies/#findComment-97091
Share on other sites

Could we also use it for anyone who spits in public? I don't understand why smoking isn't allowed in pubs, full fat milk is regarded as injurious to adult health (by the standards of any other food it's actually low fat), fat people are the objective of universal criticism - and yet spitting passes entirely without comment. I wouldn't even mind if they spat discreetly into the gutter but they sort of regurgitate massive floppy oysters almost directly on their own shoes. Even children do it. Why???
Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/3107-plague-mummies/#findComment-97193
Share on other sites

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

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “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. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • 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?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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