AnotherPaul

If you know who this local man please contact the Police https://news.met.police.uk/news/appeal-to-identify-man-after-racist-graffiti-written-on-sign-at-dulwich-hamlet-fc-487219.

That they look like a charity but are in fact a business - I asked the group leader who told me that - and have read about these businesses before, after being ripped off by similar outfit up in central a few years ago. Real charities are regulated, there are rules about where the money goes. I'm sure there are people, especially the kids, who are doing it for all the right reasons. But the point stands. They seem to be a charity but they're not.

The young people who sell 'charity' magazines outside Superdrug on Saturdays work for a business, not a charity. The claim that profits go to somehow address knife crime issues is nonsense devised to pull at heart strings. If it were actually a charity they would be asking for Direct Debit sign-ups which would mean the organisation could predict its' income - like a real charity - but they don't because whoever is employing them wants cash. In return for a really poor magazine. The kids doing the chugging are not to blame, they've been lied to, so be nice but do say "no".

We?re in a climate emergency, taking action against people who choose to drive the most fuel consuming cars is perfectly justified. One may not like the manner of the protest but I?d wager you?ll be far more annoyed if your grandchildren live on an uninhabitable planet. Many thought trade union movement was annoying, the suffragettes too and the idea that there should be one person one vote. Those who promoted those ideas were vilified, but they were right. Keep deflating tyres. Do everything we can to change out current collision course with disaster. And try not to complain too much in the face of environmental apocalypse. It?s a bad look.

Abe_froeman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This thread is about Cox's walk, not about how > virtuous you consider yourself. Maybe it?s about both? Although reducing ones ?Carbon footprint for decades? is a phrase both up itself and a anachronistic - BP invented carbon footprints in the mid 90s to make us feel like climate change is our fault when clearly it?s theirs.

A good but unlikely reason to lock gates would be that it?s a reaction to NYE revellers setting a fire, munching edibles and leaving behind their rubbish including Cider cans and tofu packaging. Tofu packaging!!! Dulwich, 2020.

Abe, clearly it?s not ?solely?.

almost peckham Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It's a fair point, Anotherpaul. "The club", the > entity that is evoking such strong feelings is an > amalgam of people. The club is constituted by > people: their work, support, feelings, and > kinship. It is not constituted by architecture. > People make places, not buildings. On this view > 'the club' could plausibly play football at any > number of spaces, it is not limited to the > proposition on the table. This is evidenced by > 'the club' playing at Tooting but it could be > elsewhere. And that was not in any way the point of what I wrote, as you probably understand. So, to be clear Almost Peckham, there are no viable alternatives for Hamlet to relocate. Ground shares result in a significant reduction in income, if one does not own one's own stadium and bar then it is virtually impossible to finance a non-league football club. We learned that in our time at Tooting. Also, the history of ground shares does not suggest that is a good idea. Charlton, Palace, Wimbledon, Coventry, they've all done it but not as a preferable choice - it causes long-term problems which still need fixing by eventually finding a permanent home. In attempting to suggest The Hamlet could move you have drawn attention to the fact that you think your opinion should cause the uprooting of a local institution. Champion Hill is the home of Dulwich Hamlet, as it has been for over 100 years. This redevelopment project was conceived to perpetuate that, to keep the club in Dulwich where it does a lot of good. You're entitled to your opinion but suggesting the football club could simply relocate is not a useful, practical or evidence based opinion.

The club is the people you are currently unwilling to trust. They organise the functioning of the club, the money to recruit and pay the staff and team, the ground, facilities, safety, bar - all of it, without them there is no club. So when anyone says they don't trust the people who run the club but also "I love the club" one is embracing two opposing arguments which should be mutually exclusive.

Very clear that neither of you have attended public meetings at the club about this very subject. There is a planning application with Southwark for them review. In that application there are proposals for a new ground behind the current one, and housing to be built where the current ground is. The planning application should have been reviewed last year so if any actor in this is not doing the right thing it's the Council. Please feel free to bang-on about things you know nothing about maybe keep the word 'fraud' and phrases like 'they'll get the message' out of it. Utterly unhelpful.

There's a connection between underfunded councils and using council open spaces for commercial ventures, of which there are far more than there were 10 years ago. Ignore the relationship all you want, but we'll be back here in 6 months talking about another event on another park and how it's wrong. I politely decline to enter into some spat over the election result, I'm not a Labour election strategist so the loss is not really mine. But thanks for reminding me that you exist.

Considering how underfunded the council is now and will be in the future there will only be more of this kind of thing. If you voted Tory this misuse of parks is your fault.

To register a complaint with M&S, their retail customer line is 0333 014 8555. There is no email address.

The driver was following his Wayz route?

alice Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The money isn?t being sent to Brazil. They do a > lot of good work locally. I appreciate your sincerity but that's not my point. They (the church, not the individuals in M&S) support actual fascists to help them win power and set themselves against the religions of indigenous people of the Amazon. That's Christians running a highly profitable commercial church which has been repeatedly accused of money laundering, telling people whose ancestral land it is they are wrong to hold their own beliefs. There is no local work they can do which assuages their behaviour elsewhere.

M&S have a policy which allows individual store managers to choose who collects for charity in their shops. I'd wager the UCKG knows this, according to the internet they've also been collecting in M&S Dalston.

Thanks for your concern but I have raised this issue with M&S and will let you know how that goes. But I thought seeing as the shop is a public space others might do with knowing a little of the background to who they are.

The UCKG are a commercial church whose owner is worth 1.1bn USD with more controversial stories including its' pre-election support for the new fascist leader of Brasil, and yet they are collecting money in our local Lordship Lane M&S. Surely M&S could have found a local charity free of dodgy attitudes to invite collect? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Church_of_the_Kingdom_of_God So please, this Christmas, don't give fascist sympathisers your money.

Cheese Matters, which would cause a Health Block

Favourable Chicken Coop?

Sweaty Betty + Really Maria = ?Sweaty Maria? (yuk) and ?Really Betty? (ooh matron).

The first word used by you Kk was "weirdly". That's not gentle, it's "your comment is Weird". Soon after I was "hiding behind a keyboard". What response did you expect? Of course I don't expect people to agree with me. I did naively expect people to actually converse rather than dissect and slur. Best I expect more someplace else.

The forum has administrators. If my comments were offensive or legally contentious the thread would have been removed. That was not the case. What has occurred is one person has decided to question my motives fairly aggressively, using their keyboard to publicly invalidate the thoughts of another. Now that is hiding behind a keyboard if ever I saw it. And now we have three of them circling, agreeing with each other, repeating the same guff in public to make them appear to be more valid than me. Please no! I can't stand being told off by these incredibly wise people who are obvs my betters. You've found me out, I am rumbled, laid bare - and it is you keyboard warriors of the forum who have shown me the error of my ways. Thank you. I shall learn from this in so many ways. More seriously, if you behaved like this in a school it would be called bullying.