Jump to content

Recommended Posts

My last post seems to have disappeared from the thread????


:-S



Edited to say: It said that I felt that trying to compare entertainment was trying to compare chalk and cheese ... where's it gone?!


On request I had cleaned up this thread so that a number irrelevant messages were removed, the original poster wants to keep this as "on topic" as possible - The Administrator

Hoopers is 100 yards from having an SE22 post code and less than 500 yards from ED station. However its 1/2 mile from Denmark Hill station and a mile from Camberwell Green. Yes you're correct its got a Camberwell post code but how many people define where they live by their post code. People live in areas that border other areas which means there are blurred definitions. No boundary will please everyone but using a post code strikes me as being clumsy.

As I said before: "The border will be SE22/East Dulwich only, we have to draw a line somewhere and the SE22 border seems like the most obvious way to do it, but we would consider moving it based on nominations received."


To expand further, say Hoopers gets nominated for something then we'll include because it's close by the SE22 border, however if The White Hart in Bath was nominated then we won't include it because it's not close by the SE22 border. This seems like an obvious way to do it to us but please let us know if you have a better suggestion.


Categories are being decided tomorrow, any more good suggestions?

Postcode snobbery. Oglander, Ondine and Coplestone Road are all SE15. A matter of minutes from East Dulwich Station. Hayes Grove is SE22. It is adjacent to Copleston Road. St. John's Church on East Dulwich Road is SE22. The school attached on Adys Road is SE15!!!!! The lovely new chocolate shop in Bellenden Road is SE15. Bellenden Village innit!


I like the way your mind works JamesG.

Cate & JamesG, all the places you mention are great, as are other places in Peckham/Camberwell. Believe me, if I could vote for Ganapati, I would in a flash, but they simply are not in East Dulwich, and if these are the East Dulwich awards arranged by the people at the East Dulwich Forum, I don't see how you can call that snobbery, it is just geography, plain and simple.


I doubt organisers of a Peckham awards, of Forest Hill awards would allow someone to noninante the Bishop.

Keef Wrote:

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

> Cate & JamesG, all the places you mention are

> great, as are other places in Peckham/Camberwell.

> Believe me, if I could vote for Ganapati, I would

> in a flash, but they simply are not in East

> Dulwich, and if these are the East Dulwich awards

> arranged by the people at the East Dulwich Forum,

> I don't see how you can call that snobbery, it is

> just geography, plain and simple.

>

> I doubt organisers of a Peckham awards, of Forest

> Hill awards would allow someone to noninante the

> Bishop.


Keef, my point is simple. Defining East Dulwich by post code is crude and simple. Hoopers for example (with a Camberwell postcode) is considerably closer to the social centre of ED than Camberwell. We do not dictate our purchasing behaviour or social behaviour by postcodes. For example I may go out for a drink in Clapham but not SW12!!! If when voting starts there are considerable votes for The Duke in Nunhead for example it should be registered and counted. After all the purpose is to ascertain where we like going/shoping/eating etc ?locally?, not where we like going up to a set of road boundaries as defined by the Royal Mail in the 60?s!

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

    • The driver was male he was on a mobile No one was hurt l. Complete dick
    • Surely the question is whether James Mcash is effective in his various roles? I've seen nothing to suggest otherwise as a GG councillor or cabinet member. No idea about the teaching but he's made a career of it, so one would think he's perfectly fine on that front too. What I do object to is him being elected under one banner and hopping under another one, I suspect out of naked self interest. His headline rationale for the move is scarcely credible. He claims "the council was “planning for funding gaps larger than those faced in almost every year of Conservative and Liberal Democrat austerity, this time imposed by a Labour government...Unless something changes, Labour cuts will devastate the local services that as residents of this fantastic borough, we all rely on.” But what he's actually talking about here is the new Fair Funding Review, undertaken by notorious Tories Angela Rayner and Jim McMahon.   https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/the-fair-funding-review-20/the-fair-funding-review-20 The Fair Funding Review is explicitly about the redistribution of resources based on updated needs assessment, which, last time I looked was a key tenet of the left (including the Greens). Mcash also claims Southwark "cannot and does not stand up the the government" but that simply isn't the case as Southwark, Lambeth and London Councils have objected to the FFR because it fails to take into account Londoners' high housing costs. https://www.southwark.gov.uk/news/2025/southwark-and-lambeth-leaders-call-fair-funding  He seems high on bluster and low on actual detail. And the great problem Greens have to overcome, like everyone else, is that the country has no money.       
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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