LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[Bicknell]

sorry forgot to say thanks @legalalien. yes this works

[Nigello]

Is there any outcome from the 8 July meeting (online, I think) regarding traffic measures around Goodrich School?

[ohthehugemanateeLTN3]

luvLTNrichguy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> My post is gone too - but my account is active.

> Not had any messages as to why the post was

> removed?.

>

> Doubt it was admins Manatee. More likely members

> reporting the posts. And, frankly, given the

> unpalatable nature of your content it?s no

> surprise really 😉

Unpalatable how? More so than "jokingly" referring to the residents of a road as horror film murders because a traffic gate was installed ages ago? More so that saying cyclists are to be despised? More so than comparing the plight of drivers to Jews in 1930s Germany? Everything I've said is in direct reference to something brought up on this thread by the anti-LTN group. It seems that pointing such things out is far more unpalatable than saying them in the first place. But then I am beginning to suspect admin bias against LTNs now.

Thing is even if you are right about the anti-LTN people mass reporting inconvenient posts, they have no capacity to get posts or whole user accounts deleted.

If you want an honest debate, you better reply fast before I'm caught again!

[DuncanW]

Was it not for the multiple in line responses?

[ohthehugemanateeLTN3]

DuncanW Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Was it not for the multiple in line responses?

A complete ban, deletion of all accounts and banning of IP address seems a little overboard for inadequate removal of context especially as it's hard to go point by point through someone's message without inline responses.

[Rockets]

Manatee - do you have more than one account registered from your ip address?

Admin maintains a very balanced and fair approach to policing the forum so the removal of your posts will not be for a trivial matter.

[ohthehugemanateeLTN3]

Rockets Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Manatee - do you have more than one account

> registered from your ip address?

I'm on the internet via my phone, and I believe the phone company hands out IP addresses at random. Either way, even if someone else had the same IP address at some point (perfectly possible), why delete the account and all posts?

> Admin maintains a very balanced and fair approach

> to policing the forum so the removal of your posts

> will not be for a trivial matter.

Interesting that they refuse to let anyone know what the reason is. No message, nothing, just an aoutright ban of the hardest sort they can muster. You have most likely seen every one of Manatee's posts (possibly except the one in the Gail's thread where I said I would no longer be shopping there after hearing the owner funds a Tory anti-lockdown group).

It would seem that bringing up points raised on this thread is "unpalatable" according to some. Though none of the original points seem to be considered sufficiently unpalatable it would seem.

[Rockets]

Ah, so a deletion of ALL accounts....there you go....if you you were posting under multiple handles from a single IP address then that's probably why you have been banned. And rightly so....

[ohthehugemanateeLTN3]

Rockets Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Ah, so a deletion of ALL accounts....

Well technically 1 of 1 is all. So I guess from a terribly pedantic point of view you are correct.

The first huge manatee account was just that, the first and it (singular) was deleted along with all posts.

I think you're massively stretching to find reasons why I was banned that don't involve my pro LTN views. The trouble is, those reasons don't exist. So sorry mate it was one account, and everything I wrote you have seen. Why do you think I was banned and had my posts along with the posts of a number of regulars that referenced mine (though not yours I see, which is nice for you) deleted?

> there you

> go....if you you were posting under multiple

> handles from a single IP address then that's

> probably why you have been banned.

Big if though isn't it!

> And rightly

> so....

So no one on the forum is allowed to have a different account from their flatmates or SO? Because they'll all be posting from the same IP if they are on the same home router. I guess that's one way to skew the results. One view per household. Less if you share with neighbours in the building.

[Rockets]

Each device that accesses the internet is allocated a seperate and unique IP address (not just the router that is acting as the gateway) so unless the flatmates are sharing the same device then each device that logs-in is uniquely identifiable.

Anyway, there are plenty of people on here who have expressed pro-LTN views and haven't been banned so your banning is obviously for something else. Sorry to break it to you but admin doesn't ban people on the basis of pro-LTN (or-anti) views and if they have barred your IP address then you have clearly breached the rules of usage for the forum.

Getting banned in little under a day is very impressive! - that must be some kind of record!

[Rockets]

Nigello Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Is there any outcome from the 8 July meeting

> (online, I think) regarding traffic measures

> around Goodrich School?

Nigello, do we know what was due to be discussed?

[Nigello]

No - I was on leave so explained I could not go when I replied to Cllr Browning who had mentioned it to me via email. Someone on here had also posted about its taking place, several days before the date (8 July).

[dougiefreeman]

So any idea when we get to see the results of the consultation?

Have they said a timeframe?

[legalalien]

There don?t look to be any minutes : agenda for the Goodrich meeting on the website

https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=533&MId=7169

[Metallic]

dougiefreeman Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So any idea when we get to see the results of the

> consultation?

>

> Have they said a timeframe?

October.

[ohthehugemanateeLTN3]

Rockets Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Each device that accesses the internet is

> allocated a seperate and unique IP address (not

> just the router that is acting as the gateway) so

> unless the flatmates are sharing the same device

> then each device that logs-in is uniquely

> identifiable.

You are mistaken. My home network is IPv4 because I used the router my ISP provided, and the router does NAT. All internal addresses are in the 192.168 subnet, and all present externally as the address of my router. This is how private-to-public NAT works. Each device on the *publicly routable internet* has a unique IP, NAT is the mechanism that allows machines on private subnets (10. and 192.168) to access the internet by altering the IP packets so it appears they all come from the single public device that does the NAT. Various services will tell you your IP address and you can verify this if your network is similar to mine.

I don't want to get into the guts of RFCs and whatnot, because that would be getting rather off topic, but you can get a primer here in this section of the wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_address_translation#One-to-many_NAT

> Anyway, there are plenty of people on here who

> have expressed pro-LTN views and haven't been

> banned

Maybe my kung fu was too powerful.

> if they have barred your IP address then you

> have clearly breached the rules of usage for the

> forum.

And yet no reason presents.

> Getting banned in little under a day is very

> impressive! - that must be some kind of record!

Thankyou! I take it to be the strongest of compliments to the strength of my pro-LTN debating skills.

[hpsaucey]

Re:

'> Getting banned in little under a day is very

> impressive! - that must be some kind of record!

Thankyou! I take it to be the strongest of compliments to the strength of my pro-LTN debating skills.'

❤️❤️❤️

[ab29]

So all those pro-LTNs supporters turn out to be one person, trying to make an impression there is an army out there ;)

[hpsaucey]

ab29 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So all those pro-LTNs supporters turn out to be

> one person, trying to make an impression there is

> an army out there ;)

Ha - wishful thinking.

[ohthehugemanateeLTN3]

What's with making it personal, ab29?

I've been accused of being boohooLTN (because I took inspiration from their handle) and now am I being accused of being hpsaucey. Or they've been accused of being me. I don't find it insulting because they seem like nice, reasonable people, but it you do seem to attempting to discredit people you disagree with by engaging in personal attacks.

If you can't attack the argument, attack the messenger and all that.

I can't claim to have only ever had one account (that would be absurd since we all know Manatee and Manatee2 were me), but I have never had multiple active accounts (to avoid excessive pedantry, we can all agree that a blocked account isn't active, right?).

[Rockets]

Metallic Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> dougiefreeman Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > So any idea when we get to see the results of

> the

> > consultation?

> >

> > Have they said a timeframe?

>

> October.

Metallic - do you know when they said this?

[Rockets]

Interesting update from One Dulwich today:

ear all,

Southwark?s new plan for Dulwich Village junction

An FOI (Freedom of Information request) to TfL has revealed that Council officers asked for a meeting to discuss their new plan for Dulwich Village junction on 1 July ? that is, well before the end of the public consultation on 18 July. See the attached news report here.

A few questions:

If Council officers had already come up with a plan for the central part of the scheme ? which affects traffic and air quality over a wide area ? why bother with all the trouble and expense of a public consultation? What else have they already decided?

Why wasn?t this plan mentioned at any of the public meetings in July? Or didn?t Cllr Rose know about it?

The plan allows emergency vehicles through ? a long-overdue change that the London Ambulance Service has been fighting for since the summer of 2020. But do Council officers not understand that this limited concession doesn?t answer any of the concerns raised by residents and local businesses about traffic displacement, access, and discrimination against vulnerable groups with mobility problems?

Our response to Southwark?s Equality Impact Assessment

Two days before the extended deadline of the public consultation, an interim EqIA appeared on Southwark?s website. It?s so general, and so biased ? no data or knowledge specifically relating to the Dulwich scheme ? that it isn?t fit for purpose. You can read our review of it here.

Data: the unanswered questions

Please see the Dulwich Alliance?s summary of all the questions that remain unanswered from the Dulwich Streetspace Review data meeting on 13 July. Southwark has said it intends to continue to publish data throughout the summer (with April traffic data and air quality modelling data available at the end of July, and June traffic data by the end of August). Why is this all so late?

Our legal challenge

Given everything we?ve seen and heard over the past few weeks, we don?t feel confident that Southwark Council?s decision on the final Streetspace scheme in October will be fair or just. With our friends and colleagues at the Dulwich Alliance, we have appointed a senior and experienced lawyer who, over the coming weeks, will review all relevant material and advise on our legal options. Please, if you can, donate to our fighting fund.

[Administrator]

Please stop talking off-topic about yourselves and each other.

Talk about "LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3" or I will Lounge this.

[exdulwicher]

If Council officers had already come up with a plan for the central part of the scheme ? which affects traffic and air quality over a wide area ? why bother with all the trouble and expense of a public consultation? What else have they already decided?

You're allowed to discuss other options, even while a consultation is ongoing - in many ways it's actually more efficient because at the end of the consultation you can look at the results and have options to come back with. If majority is in favour of as is then there's not really much to do but if the majority is in favour of "a change" then you can quickly come back and say "we've heard your views that you don't like the current system so here are some changes proposed, what do you think?"

Caveat that it's tied in with the data so if the data is broadly positive and the negativity is in a minority you still don't need to change anything because it's working. But it's always good to have a few back up options, perhaps based on specific feedback that's been picked out during the consultation.

October.

That's about right - couple of months to collate the results of the consultation, run some validity tests on the data, write it all up and present it to the council and for the council to then agree the next course of action based on the responses.

I still think you're trying to find some kind of conspiracy where there isn't one to be honest. It's not unusual for a council to be discussing further traffic management options even during existing consultations, they're not being underhand or doing anything illegal.

[Metallic]

Rockets Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Metallic Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > dougiefreeman Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > So any idea when we get to see the results of

> > the

> > > consultation?

> > >

> > > Have they said a timeframe?

> >

> > October.

>

>

> Metallic - do you know when they said this?

I believe Catherine Rose has said it numerous times in her interminable rambles.