Spartacus

You seem to have a lot of "personal" knowledge here Mal. Hope your priest doesn't get easily embarrassed during confession 🤣

If you feel that the LTN was introduced correctly, is valid and has local support, then you have nothing to fear from closer scrutiny and publicity. But your cry, "5 years after it's happened" dismisses 5 years of concern by residents and makes you sound like you fear additional scrutiny.

Good to see that Richard, from One Dulwich, isn't afraid to provide his name. LTNs need community support and not just council officials telling communities what they want, after all we elect them and indirectly pay their wages so why shouldn't they listen to their electorate?

Surely it has to be "the knocking shop" (1860s slang) as it is the oldest profession around 😅 It always surprised me that one used to operate on Bawdale Road, just around the corner from the old police station (so I've been told 🤭)

My suggestion is try it, if it can't find a restore point, no harm done, if it does then your decision on continuing and pressing finish but to be honest you have little to lose especially as you have successful backed up.the data 😉

Did you sort it or return it to John Lewis in the end ?

I'm confused, are Dulwich roads implying that the cyclist in the picture was moving at over 20mph and damaged the concrete block ? Oh my !

You should be able to do it in safe mode In the windows search bbox at the bottom of the page type control panel Open the Control Panel Select Recovery Select Open System Restore Select the restore point to use from the list Select Next Select Finish Windows will restart automatically

Hi Sue you can try to restore your Laptop to a previous restore point prior to last Monday if you have recovery switched on To restore Windows to a previous date, you can use the System Restore feature. This feature returns your computer's system files to an earlier point in time. It can help fix recent software issues without affecting your personal files. Steps to restore Windows to a previous date Click System Restore Click Next Select a restore point (date just prior to last Monday 3pm ) Click Next again Confirm the restore point and system restoration Click Finish Click Restart Open the System Protection tab

It probably was click bate, however the point I was making is that it's not just in East Dulwich where people are complaining about cyclists. But of course you want to dismiss it as it reflects what others on here are posting about.

Looks like ED isn't the only place where bad cycling is drawing the wrong sort of attention to cycling https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/24878645.can-cycling-oxford-made-safer-ban-cycling/ Similar comments to this thread by some, maybe it's not just an East Dulwich rant after all.

This is a perfect example of why cyclists need to be regulated and adhere to the rules. The highway code was changed to protect the most vulnerable road users with pedestrians bring in the most vulnerable category, yet Malumbu is clearly showing a disregard for that group because they "stepped into the path of a cyclist." Nice home goal there pal

Earl clutching at straws and doubling down on their statement that by applying the same speed limits to all road users, including cyclists, it makes it less safe for cyclists.

You would have though, but logic doesn't exist on EarlsWorld (its not a new fun theme park by the way) How on earth do you come up with that What's in the pipe you are smoking?

Well that's a new one, somehow you've turned the usual whataboutmotorists bleat into whatabouthorses Somehow I can't see Jodpher Jerks, the equivalent slur to Lycra Louts, riding rampage through the streets of Southwark 😅

No, it's been said it's unworkable for various reasons, but no one has said why the sane rules shouldn't be applied to them. Being unworkable is a practical issue, but objecting to the rules being applied is the question. Therefore if it was workable, would you still not want speed limits applied to cyclistsf? Feels like you don't and therein lies the problem. It should be one set of rules for all road users, not a case of woolies pick n mix depending on which mode of transport you use.

Are you the Forum Police now? 😅

"Broken windows" By allowing cyclists to travel faster than the speed limit, and with modern road bikes weighing less than a fly it's actually easy to go over 20mph, then cyclists feel the speed limit or rules don't apply to them, which leads to the broken window effect where they push the boundaries of what they can get away with, jumping lights because "it takes momentum to stop and start", riding over crossings, cycling on pavements, not having clear lights on at night... By simply applying the same rules to all road users, I.e. obey the speed limit, it might start to curb other bad behavior thus making roads safer for all. I'll ask a question of those who oppose it, and I asked it a few days ago on a different way, why are you so determined not to have the same rules applied to all? Is it because you consider yourselves rebels who can do what you want or simply because you yourselves know you don't stick to the rules ?

Looks like the "cost" of licencing cyclists could no longer be a factor as this goverent is about to introduce digital driving licences. BBC News - UK set to introduce digital driving licences https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cgkjjkjy4p8o They could simply add a category for cyclists and bobs your auntie, digital cycling licence... although I can see the argument now about this becoming our digital id card....

Malumbu and his cycling friends look on with blinkers clearly not seeing the cyclists of East Dulwich behaving badly

If you have a mobile phone then you are already capable of being tracked using your relative location to phone masts or your WiFi usage. On top of that a lot of cyclists use gps apps to track their route and speeds. Most people make sure their phone battery lasts the day so technically it's not a radical shift, privacy laws not withstanding, for your movement and speed to be tracked by your phone, be it on foot, car or bike. Big brother is already here 😅

I think from the discussion here alone that your statement is poppycock and fantasy A good case for licencing is simply to stop antisocial behaviour but I guess when cars are less prevalent on thw roads, government and councils will look to make up financial shortfalls from ved, ltns, traffic fines and tax on fuel / ipt and purchase price, so that alone may force them into licencing. Getting rid of cars is not a zero sum game

I am assumimg that those most vocal about not licencing cyclists are all perfectly well behaved cyclists who never bend the rules, so why the uproar as these measures wouldn't be aimed at you? Or do you all have habits that it would expose?

Let's debunk that snowy To drive a vehicle you need a licence that shows you have pased a test to drive. Cars carry registration plates and the owner is deemed responsible unless they can prove someone else was driving it. Same principle should apply to bikes so it's not cyclists that need identification plates but the bike and like a car driver cyclists should be licenced.

Yes, authorities do have the rights to stop and fine cyclists, but the big issue there is how do they enforce it. Wardens or police at every crossing? Impractical and costly, stopping cyclists when they see it, short of being able to catch them and talk to them it's almost impossible. Cameras, like the ones used for motor vehicles, only practical if cyclists can be identified so that means licencing and registration plates. Cost wise, like all schemes, it will pay for itself in registration fees and penalties. But yet again you want to push the narrative that cyclists should be above the law and it's not worth regulating them.