first mate

JohnL Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > A lot of Tory Accounts seem to be saying "well who > actually really obeyed the Covid laws" > > They don't seem to understand how many of us did > obey them and took them seriously. Not only that, there is by some an implication that those who did follow the rules have only themselves to blame for being so gullible and so dumb.

Do you seriously believe that not one of those you mention has ever cycled? Seriously? tom1975 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I would like to invite Nigello, CPR Dave, Rockets > and anyone else to join me next Wednesday on the > school cycle run from ED to Dulwich so you can all > experience what it's like to ride in London beside > buses and cars. I think it would be enjoyable and > educational for you and hopefully reduce the > amount of hostility you feel towards cyclists. The > only way to improve the impression you have is to > join in the experience for yourself and learn from > it. > > We will commute to my childs school and then > continue to my office north of the West End. That > includes going up Dog Kennel hill at decent speed > then past Kings and through Camberwell, onto > Elephant Castle and Waterloo, all in peak-hour > traffic. I hope you're of reasonable fitness > because I need to be at work for 9:15am. > > You can make your own way home and we'll meet the > morning after to repeat the journey and discuss > what you've learnt and why cyclists may choose to > jump red lights to remain safe and why children > ride on the footpath. > > Anyone interested can meet me on the corner of > Friern Rd and Goodrich Rd at 8:20am next > Wednesday.

And, no doubt, LTNs will have negatively impacted deliveries if more reliance on vans?

A more grownup response would offer reassurance that collective efforts being made to solve issue, not 'remember it is not our responsibility'.

Leeming's helpful comment stating that we should all 'remember' Thames Water are to blame, not the Council, is pathetic. Aren't the Council meant to liaise with utility companies to manage situations? It does not invite confidence in this council to be concerned about managing anything, other than their own political careers.

Is external rendering of old brick structures advisable? Don't bricks need to breathe? Genuine question as, from what you say, anyone with an old victorian or Edwardian house is probably going to need to render externally to get sufficient insulation?

I agree, the noise aspect could make them unsuitable for many urban dwellings, especially terrace homes where everyone is so close together.

I hope it is challenged. Very Big Brother.

That photo is a bit juvenile and tribal, a bit Beavis and Butthead..amusing if you are around 10. It is quite revealing though and not necessarily in a good way.

Also loads of missing deliveries. Once has been cancelled and resent three times, the last allegedly next day with signature...it has not arrived. The service is diabolical.

Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Maybe Cllr McAsh can put this to bed once and for > all by answering a few questions: > > 1) Where is the Jan 19 data from (for what > purposes was it collected and from which point was > it collected as it is not the same location as the > Sept 21 monitoring point)? > 2) What methodology was used to arrive at the Sept > 21 figure? > 3) Why does the EDG Central chart say: the > Pre-implementation data for Jan 2019 has been > adjusted to September 2019 levels to ensure > compatibility and what adjustment took place and > why? > 4) Why was the decision taken to add the EDG > Central monitoring point in Sept 21?

Why do you feel so strongly that the issue should not be aired and pursued on this forum? Again, you are not obliged to read or contribute?

Earlier in this thread Cllr Mc Ash was adamant that no figures had been adjusted. Hmmm. I wonder if he can tell us more? Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Legal I believe the EDG Central data from Jan 19 > was from a different location (has the council > clarified where it was?) and then was "adjusted" > to create Sept 19 numbers. That adjustment seems > to have been adding MG numbers to EDG numbers to > create a much bigger number of cars to deliver a > "reduction" in numbers compared to new Sept 21 > data from the new site on EDG Central that had not > been previously monitored. > > But it looks like this is based on modelling > rather than actual data as the council charts > clearly show no data was collected at the EDG > Central point in Sept 19 and there is a disclaimer > to that effect on the EDG Central slide. > > If you use the Jan 19 figures alone from the old > monitoring point then there has been no > reduction. > > The creation of the EDG Central monitoring point > seems to have only been done to create the > narrative for the U-turn as it seems odd adding it > in so late into the process and going to such an > effort to create the Sept 19 figures. > > I don?t think the council has done this anywhere > else have they? > > Perhaps Cllr McAsh or one of the council's > spokespeople from Melbourne Grove would like to > clarify as it is beyond confusing...;-)

Legal, agree. We need to keep this thread open for now. I find it really odd that some posters declare they want it lounged. If they view it as so unimportant why continue to read and contribute?

I think I may detect a very deliberate attempt to get this thread lounged. So to get back on track perhaps we can return to one of Heartblock's informed posts and who I hope soon returns: Heartblock wrote "The September 2021 figures have been set against 2019 figures from ?a comparable location? (it?s not stated where this is), and seem to have had an enormous influence on Southwark?s thinking" and "apparently this shows that traffic in the middle of the road went down between 2019 and 2021, even though traffic at either end (the Dulwich Village end and the Goose Green end) went up" How does traffic in the middle of a road with closed roads all around go down 20% when it is up 26% at both ends with nowhere to go - this 20% also being calculated by dubious pre-lockdown figure. It would be good if this could be explained.

Pots and kettles.

Gaming consultations is a council specialty. At the CPZ Cllr McAsh repeated over and over how vital it was each street was consulted separately. However, when MG did not deliver the necessary majority in favour of CPZ, loand behold, the council decided to divide the street in two! That's the way they roll.

You are not forced to read this thread, not even at Christmas, but understand you may want it lounged and out of the way for political reasons. Council consultations are meant to inform decision making otherwise they become pointless window dressing, as is evident with LTNs. If, as seems to be the case, the council does not listen to all residents in an equitable fashion and simultaneously relies on dodgy data to prop up the decision it does take, that is an assault on democracy.

Well Rah I believe they have eroded the democratic process and so do many others. As I said, LTNs are a case of the 'Emperor's New Clothes'. We'll just have to agree to disagree as neither will seemingly convince the other. I suspect many will now focus on getting the current incumbents voted out in May...not so far off.

I think one of the questions in regard to Rah was why he/she chose to cycle, with children, right into and through the area where protestors were gathered. Don't go on about dangers to children when you have made a choice to take them through a group of protestors. That route cannot have been the only route? However, thought we had done this and gone into it all in detail ages ago? To get back on thread, having seen the way the council have, wittingly or unwittingly, eroded the democratic process, both with LTNs and with CPZ, I have honestly lost all respect for them. I also feel councillors have been partial and fixated on their own agendas and have not listened as they promised they would. I am also tired of the council and its supporters trying, by whatever means, to persuade us black is white. The whole LTN fiasco is a case of the 'Emperor's New Clothes'.

Sorry Rx3 but dodgy data should not satisfy anyone.

Deeply cynical and self-serving move by the Council, what a bunch. In terms of shady data manipulation, they pulled a similar stunt with Melbourne Grove re CPZ. Roll on the elections.

Surely data should always be scoured, especially if the methodology is suspect? No true scientist should ever object to data being scoured nor robust questioning of the methodology, especially if that data is used to support apparently unpopular policy measures. The charge is that those who object are 'sheeple' and of 'confirmation bias' a case of pots and kettles it would seem.

To quote Heartblock "Quite a few Goose Green and Village residents are experts in or use statistical analysis and data science, they are very well aware of the holes in this piece of work. Consequences from improperly collected data include the inability to answer research questions accurately, the inability to repeat and validate a study, distorted findings resulting in wasted resources, misleading other researchers to pursue fruitless avenues of investigation and importantly for this report - compromising decisions for public policy."

Notice e-scooters seem to have replaced biked outside ED station.