Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Right, it's been going for over a month now, and there have been a good few threads started, and discussed in varying depth, some not making it to 2 pages, some going for several.


So, is it working, what do people really think?


Please note, I am not starting this thread to annoy anyone, and will be interested to hear positive and negative feedback. The reason I start it, is because it came up in another, totally unrelated, thread, but thought it would be good to open up the wider debate.


Okay, for me, it doesn't work, I was all for it, but now it?s here, I feel it has taken something away form the forum. Debates in there often lose input from some good posters who seem to prefer the lounge. The Lounge misses out on some good threads, and is now a bit naff, whilst threads in the drawing room are taken far too seriously by a small number of contributors.


Personally, rather than a separate Lounge, and Drawing room, I?d rather see a Lounge for chat about whatever, and a ?fun room? for the likes of the song game and all those threads which just won?t die!!!

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/7897-drawing-room-yay-or-nay/
Share on other sites

Well 3 seperate posts have had a reply on them already today, which is not always the case.


Went to go on there the other day when I read that "Admin was in a bad mood" so I got the hell out of there as fast as my little tootsies would take me...

In general, the various changes to the Forum don't really suit me.


The Drawing Room looks and feels too heavy-going, despite efforts and claims for it not to be so. It's perception as much as anything. Scatter the drawing room threads in the diversity of the lounge and I'll look-in on them and contribute. Put them all in one place and I just see the list of thread topics and can't really be arsed.


The splitting-up of wanted/offered/classifieds seems to have resulted in me not looking at any of them, which is a shame as it used to be a 'you never know what'll pop up' page which you could have a quick look at; a place where surprisingly entertaining threads could develop out of nowhere. It used to be like a shop where entertaining things occurred on a regular basis, and then as a by-product of being in there, you ended-up buying something.


Admittedly many of these changes probably serve the majority of users on here better than the old forum did - and ultimately, I fear I must accept that this place isn't set-up entirely for my own personal whim and amusement.

Yea


Although I do agree with an observation I read that the Gossip/Lounge doesn't seem to be as active and as much fun. I don't know if this is due to the increased categories, the holiday season or a temporary mood as people have got more serious with the state of the economy.

Okay, for me, it doesn't work, I was all for it, but now it?s here, I feel it has taken something away form the forum. Debates in there often lose input from some good posters who seem to prefer the lounge. The Lounge misses out on some good threads, and is now a bit naff, whilst threads in the drawing room are taken far too seriously by a small number of contributors.


Keef - I think the above summarises what I think too.


The Lounge has also suffered - its used to a good combination of serious and humourous threads and a good place to be. The Lounge needs it fair share of serious threads.


I understand that the Drawing Room idea was wanted to keep serious discussions serious, but I think its the normal life cycle of a thread in the Lounge that it will stay serious for as long as people think its important to make serious contributions. Each thread finds its own level in the Lounge.


The recent discussion on education in the Lounge ran to four pages and had input form more people than would ever have contributed in the Drawing Room before eventually going off topic.


For me personally I'd prefer to have just the Lounge - you have to put a very serious head on to go to the Drawing Room and as I don't really have one I don't go there. I don't mind making serious posts in the Lounge in between having a bit of a laugh. It should all be in the one place.

A no from me too, though I persevere in there, a bit, many good posters don't and also the chairing has been a bit inconsistent IMO- I also, like *Bob, am still confused by the classified bits and recomm etc and where to look for things or post for advice etc....and suspect that these are now viewed less? I certainly don't look, I guess admin will be able to tell us - I think the family discussion is a good addition but in all honesty rather the rest was as before. Again just my opinion and appreciate that others may well feel differently and admin et al work hard at keeping this a good forum and trying to improve on that.


*blows kiss at the lizard folk*

I would prefer it if there was just the Lounge too but as the forum grew the general opinion from feedback was that the Lounge had became a total playground and there were few "good" discussions going on any more. Another room was required where people wouldn't ruin sensible non-East Dulwich discussions. Another option was (and still is) to create a Games Room where those "threads which just won?t die" could go. Anyway the forum's flexible and it's good to know what people think so all suggestions welcome.

oh, regarding the "looking for advice" thing, they should really be in the Lounge as "I want advice on using my Mac" is not East Dulwich related but it's not a rule that's enforced heavily as I expect people would complain if the Lounge was overrun with people wanting advice.


Remember that the forum's for East Dulwich and that's always going to be the governing/deciding factor, in fact there wasn't even a Lounge once until there was a Polly D/Dulwichmum/armed robbery incident.


[edited once]

Regarding the various Classified sections, at the moment the oldest post in each section is


For Sale - about 20 hours old

Wanted - about 49 hours old

Local Biz - about 42 hours old.


I think this is an improvement, as previously, threads disappeared from the first page incredibly quickly, and got lost.


Splitting the family room discussion out from the family classifieds I think is a good thing, and a small community of family room posters, many of whom rarely come into the other discussion rooms, regularly chat and swap advice there. I think that's a real success.


If we were to close the Drawing Room, I'd definitely be in favour of creating a Games Room to put all the games or If You Were An Animal What Animal Would You Be list-type threads.

I'm mostly a lounge lizard and haven't looked much into the drawing room and when I have I have found to it to be far too serious for my liking. It reminds of some boring late night TV programme full of stuffy psuedo intellectual old farts chewing the fat over something very dull and pretentious going on and on on for hours on end until I finally find the off switch.

With regards the other sections, I never really used the wanted bit much, so no opinion. I definitely think the family room is better split in 2.


Another option was (and still is) to create a Games Room where those "threads which just won?t die" could go.


That's what I'd vote for.

Not especially relevant (or even workable) when I first heard mention of 'The Drawing Room' with 'A Chair', I imagined something slightly different.


I envisaged discussions that were both fewer and more of an 'event', and the Chair to be more of a visible personality who would add his particular influence to the discussion and thus make things all the more worth tuning-in for - Robin Day style. Possibly even name the topics, according to areas of personal interest and experience. After all.. everyone knows a lot about something. So, eg Macroban's week in The Chair would be a totally different experience to Keefs.

I also said that if I took the Chair (I was too busy), I'd happily tell everyone that it was me. It's fair enough if whoever it is wants to remain anonymous, but I felt that being open about it would be better.


As it is, "The Chair" is just like Admin, coming in to the room to tell people off, or give a stern look, without actually moving conversations on, which for me, is the role of a chair (the human kind obviously).

I'm inclined to agree with keef.

Like many things something may seem a good idea in principle but not necessarily work so well in practice.


It is of course difficult to please all of the people all of the time.

I imagine splitting off a games room might result in the slow death of games threads as they are probably something people click on trivially when posting in the lounge is a bit slow.


I like the idea of the drawing room in principle especially after many complaints that threads are undermined or that it was deemed too trivial an environment for threads like the camberwell fire, but sadly it has resulted in a stultefyinh atmospherethat has rather stifled activity in there.


I think the perception from the likes of Bob and to a lesser extent the quids and Brendans has contributed to that.


I still think it has yet to find it's feet though and there is hope for it yet.

The lounge for a while was a temple dedicated to surreality before become the catch all discussion/games room it became, If it's really as stillborn as it currently appears it may be too late for the drawing room.


*wipes face with damp sleeve* awfully dusty in here.

If someone makes a serious point in the lounge does it get shunted to the drawing room??

And why does the drawing room need an invigilator? Surely monitoring peoples contribution to a serious discussion implies that if you say the wrong thing you could be banned, Isn't that a bit un-democratic? And why do the serious conversations need monitoring and not the silly stuff in the lounge which has the potential to be much more offensive?

I like the lounge and to be honest it has more potential as a forum to discuss the serious and silly in equal depth which can only be a good thing!!


The drawing room seems to have a literary dress code, does anyonemind if I wear my smoking jacket in here?


hugs

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

    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
    • You can get a card at the till, though, to get the discount. You don't have to carry it with you (or load it onto your phone), you can just get a different card each time. Not sure what happens if they notice 🤣
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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