Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Maybe we need are there any 'Nasty' or 'Naughty' boys or girls discussions but that may smack too much of throwing car keys in the middle of the room (last week I came home with a Lotus Elan, and got rid of my Skoda)


I am of course trying to find an opposite to 'Nice' concept

EastDulwich Now that's just horrible!



Yes, I see that not everyone really appreciates the nasty and naughty. I'm not even very good at it (EastDulwich<3, you did get that that was a follow-on from the previous post, right? and that I wasn't really swearing at everyone???)

Naughty and Nasty are one thing but dear dear RosieH that was just evil in its purest form.... which of course I only do on a Wednesday night when the good Lady Vicar comes around for her weekly session.....


RosieH, if you can maintain that level of pure Evil then I may well have a job for you as her Choir Boys needs some strict discipline at the moment? B)

Well to a draw it a close for this evening it would seem there are single women in ED.

On the evidence of a flimsy and subjective definition, a good proportion would seem to be nice.

Some would appear to be complete nutbars.

But thanks to everyone that took part.


On next week's Moral Maze, 'Forest Hill chicks, anyone know any dead certs?'

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

    • CPR Dave, attendance records are available on Southwark's website. Maggie Browning has attended 100% of meetings. Jon Hartley has attended 65%.
    • I do hope NOT, wouldn't trust Farage as far as I could throw him, Starmer & co.  He's backed by GB News which focus's predominantly on immigration while the BBC focus predominantly on the Israel - Gazza conflict.   
    • Everyone gets the point that Corbynites try to make with the "total number of votes cast" statistic, it's just a specious one.  In 2017, Corbyn's Labour got fewer votes than May's Tories (both the percentage of votes and aggregate number of votes). In 2019, Corbyn's Labour fewer votes than Johnson's Tories (both the percentage of votes and aggregate number of votes); and he managed to drop 2.7 million votes or 6.9% of vote share between the two elections. I repeat, he got trounced by Boris F***ing Johnson and the Tories after the Brexit omnishambles. It is not true that a "fairer" electoral system would have seen Labour beat the Tories: Labour simply got fewer votes than the Tories. Corbyn lost twice. There is no metric by which he won the general election. His failure to win was a disaster for the UK, and let Johnson and Truss and Sunak into office. Corbynites have to let go of this delusion that Corbyn but really won somehow if you squint in a certain way. It is completely irrelevant that Labour under Corbyn got more votes than Labour under Starmer. It is like saying Hull City was more successful in its 2014 FA Cup Final than Chelsea was in its 2018 FA Cup Final, because Hull scored 2 goals when Chelsea only scored 1. But guess what - Chelsea won its game and Hull City lost. Corbyn's fans turned out to vote for him - but an even larger group of people who found him repellant were motivated enough to show up and vote Tory.
    • I guess its the thing these days to demonstrate an attitude, in this instance seemingly of the negative kind, instead of taking pride in your work and have standards then 🤷‍♀️
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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