Parking permit 100% cost increase

[mr.chicken]

19 hours ago, Rockets said:

Mr Chicken - I was merely highl

ighting the fact that you have only ever posted on this forum about LTN

Rockets, I don't think you are actively lying. I think you've done a lazy job and stopped as soon as you find something that confirms your biases.

Nonetheless what you are claiming is untrue. Can I expect an apology from you for repeatedly stating something untrue about me?

Or when you eventually find the posts you're missing, will you forget this ever happened or find some way to claim they "don't count"?

 

19 hours ago, Rockets said:

I have never suggested I was the gatekeeper of the topic but,

You are acting as such. If people have a car and the wrong opinions, or don't live in Dulwich full time, or even post to a section of the forum which appears to be invisible to you, you attack them for it. Not the arguments or the data, but the person, implying they have no right to an opinion.

 

19 hours ago, Rockets said:

in the same regard, are you appointed judge and jury on the tone of people's posts?

If I don't stand up about poor and exclusionary behavior, why should I expect others to do so? Personal attacks don't add, all they do is silence voices.

19 hours ago, Rockets said:

We will agree on one thing however and that is that I also believe there is a way to make transport better for everyone - where we probably disagree is the path authorities in London are taking to try and get us there.

Do you have a vested interest too. 😉

[first mate]

30 minutes ago, mr.chicken said:

don't stand up about poor and exclusionary behavior, why should I expect others to do so? Personal attacks don't add, all they do is silence voices.

Who has this alleged "poor and exclusionary" behaviour silenced? It certainly hasn't silenced you! 
Hyperbole is definitely a tactic though.
No doubt you will now say I have put words into your mouth.

Edited May 13, 2023 by first mate

[Spartacus]

Maybe what we need is a Battle Royale here 

Pro CPZ on one side, Anti CPZ on the other and winner gets to decide if the area gets one or not. 

It's about as scientific an argument as Southwark's consultations 😅

 

On one side we can see Mr Chicken scratching in the dirt and ex putting their Council uniform to oneside to stop it getting mucky and on the other Rockets lighting fireworks and First Mate scoffing Spinach popeye stylie before battle commences.

My money is on Rockets and First Mate winning as they have more to lose.

Anyone going to the bookies fancy putting a bet on for me. 

[Rockets]

Mr Chicken, as I mentioned previously (that you seem to have ignored) of your 87 posts they have all been in 4 threads...(and this data comes from the See All Users' Post tab associated with your account)

 

And let's look at the evidence - you have posted 86 times and those posts have been exclusively in threads with 4 subject lines:

 

1) Parking permits

 

2) LTN - Our Healthy Streets

 

3) All Streets Matter

 

4) Driving Nightmare

 

Maybe attach a post of yours not in any of those and I will stand corrected and you can attach me to the back of your cargo bike and drag me round the streets of Dulwich as a punishment! 😉

My vested interest? Seeing something that addresses the climate crisis that is fair to all. What's yours?

 

 

Edited May 13, 2023 by Rockets

[teddyboy23]

 Lambeth  parking are also putting permits up some by 385%  based on emissons . Stating its all to do with climate change .its all about making more money out of motorist.same as expanding the ulez

..

[mr.chicken]

4 hours ago, Rockets said:

your cargo bike

😉
 

Well I can tell you're a bit worried about the structural integrity of your current, favorite alternative fact because it looks like you've prepped another one ready to go!

 

[first mate]

2 hours ago, teddyboy23 said:

 Lambeth  parking are also putting permits up some by 385%  based on emissons . Stating its all to do with climate change .its all about making more money out of motorist.same as expanding the ulez

..

Yes indeed and as I keep saying, while 'saving the planet' by imposing ever increasing fees for owning any sort of car, the council are simultaneously giving over key areas of park land for polluting events, complete with generators and land churning vehicles. On top of this, attendees can be picked up and dropped off by car, with dedicated points so to do. Go figure! You'd have thought any sort of journey by car would be discouraged. But, in this case, they are making it easier.

There is only one way to make any sense of these contradictory 'green' policies and that is revenue for the council.

[Rockets]

3 hours ago, mr.chicken said:

Well I can tell you're a bit worried about the structural integrity of your current, favorite alternative fact because it looks like you've prepped another one ready to go!

 

Ha ha but you're not responding to my comment on the 4 threads you have only ever commented on that are all exclusively on one subject matter are you... do you have a defence or not...? 😉

Come on...only fair, you called me out and I responded with my defence and now you seem not so keen to try to prove me wrong...or maybe that's because I was right all along. Which one is it?

Perhaps you should be the one apologising to me for calling me a liar...

 

Are the facts I posted earlier incorrect or not or has Mr Chicken crossed the road to find something else to peck at? 😉

[mr.chicken]

10 hours ago, Rockets said:

Perhaps you should be the one apologising to me for calling me a liar...

 

Rockets, my good chap, you can invent alternative facts faster than I can rebut them. Why, in defending yourself you invented another yet another!

I'm not going...

... hey wait a minute! Have you been doing that with your traffic related facts too? 😉 

 

[Spartacus]

58 minutes ago, mr.chicken said:

 

Rockets, my good chap, you can invent alternative facts faster than I can rebut them. Why, in defending yourself you invented another yet another!

I'm not going...

... hey wait a minute! Have you been doing that with your traffic related facts too? 😉 

 

I've also just done a trawl of your posts Mr C 

Rockets is stating the truth and the fact is that all the posts you have made under Mr Chicken are all, as Rockets states, in 4 threads all parking/car related. (Check your own posting history and see) 

Maybe you had an alto ego at one time (or still do) where other topics are posted to hence your posting confusion.

To follow on from Rockets joke

Why did the chicken cross the road?

Because its liar liar pants were on fire 🤣

 

 

 

 

[teddyboy23]

Well someones gonna be left with egg on their face

[mr.chicken]

3 hours ago, teddyboy23 said:

Well someones gonna be left with egg on their face

Bit of a chicken and egg problem!

[mr.chicken]

Well Rockets and Spartacus. Let's suppose I post a link. There are a few options which follow:

1. Crickets

2. Victim blaming. As the accused its my job to jump around like a monkey on the demands of the accuser and because I didn't do that it's my fault really. This one has already started floating up.

3. Special pleading. Sure there is a post but it doesn't count for a newly invented reason so really while the accusation was wrong, it was right even if the facts disagree.

4. Not enough. I only linked one post which isn't enough so really I need to dance like a monkey more (see 2).

5. But this other thing. There was something else I did real or imagined which was bad so the accusation was right even though it was not in fact right.

6. A non apology. Along the lines of I'm sorry you feel misinformation about you is a bad thing and anyway you should have stopped us but that doesn't count anyway so really it's your fault.

7. Same mishmash as 6 but without the non apology.

8. A conspiracy theory. I'm in league with southwark Council and used their deceptive traffic measuring ninjas to break into the hosting facility and edit the database to make a false posting history.

9. 😂😂😂 an unreserved apology for making a false claim then doubling down by accusing me of lying about it 😂😂😂. It's hard to write that without an attack of the giggles.

Do those cover the choices or would you like to add another? Care to choose an option now just to keep things interesting? 😉

Oh also, the other thing before I forget, would you mind letting me and the rest of the thread know why you think it matters anyway?

[first mate]

Smashing examples of circumlocution, convolution and obfuscation.

 Still no answer to Rockets' and Spartacus' rather straightforward question.

[Rockets]

That’s some rant Mr Chicken…..but, not surprisingly,  still no response to the original question, and that probably suggests we have won the argument! Pontification is not a smart defence! 😉

[mr.chicken]

44 minutes ago, Rockets said:

That’s some rant Mr Chicken…..but, not surprisingly,  still no response to the original question, and that probably suggests we have won the argument! Pontification is not a smart defence! 😉

What question was that, rockets? All I seem to remember is you going on what you just conceded was an attack and then getting a little rude while using winky emojis.

Tell what, if you write out the apology you would give (and it must be an actual one) if I link to another post, then I'll link to it.

Can't get fairer than that! You only risk actually apologising if you were wrong, so if you don't post, it proves without a doubt you know the link will arrive as a result and that you've been a little less than accurate. 😉

[malumbu]

I'm totally lost.  But excited by the amount of traffic (posts not vehicles) on the Lounge.  Could someone summarise where we are? I quite liked posting about buses.  It seems to be Spartacus, First Mate and Rocks against Mr Chicken which appears to be unfair.  I am planning to set up an Oxford Union type debate in a local pub - seriously, obviously with no animosity. 

[Rockets]

Don’t worry Malumbu, you haven’t missed much just Mr Chicken running around like a headless namesake desperately trying to win a debate about the subject matter of their posts. They seem to have been deeply offended when presented with said facts about their posting history.

 

Malumbu I know you’re not a great fan of people positing exclusively on one discussion topic and have always called them out on it so perhaps you could be an independent adjudicator on this one and check Mr Chicken’s posting history and see if you can find anything that isn’t LTN, parking, all streets matter or driving nightmare related…..they seem to think they have posted on a broad range of subjects beyond those but a quick click on their posting history suggests that is very much not the case.

 

Come on, do it for all our sakes as it’s all getting rather boring now! 😉

 

 

 

 

[mr.chicken]

7 minutes ago, Rockets said:

they seem to think they have posted on a broad range of subjects

I made no particular claim as to the breadth merely that I have made other posts (but good job you've now also hit point 5 on my list).

Anyways, that's, what, 4 things you've invented about me on this thread?

7 minutes ago, Rockets said:

Come on, do it for all our sakes as it’s all getting rather boring now! 😉

 

Oh come now rockets, we both know you will never get bored of inventing alternative facts about me!  You do have a rich internal life and I'm flattered I'm involved in so much of it.

[first mate]

ED forum version of "I did not have sex with that woman". Or, do we have our very own forum Trump? Either way, this is a deflection game. I'm off back to the main threads. 

[Rockets]

It very much is a deflection game and is also very reminiscent of the golden days on this forum for trolls, multiple account holders and other single subject posters like ohthehugemanatee (v1/v2/v3/v4), LTNBooHoo and others (who were clearly existing forumites creating new accounts solely for the purposes of trolling) - we have seen this tactic many. many times before.

[first mate]

Yes, there does seem to be a sudden resurgence in trolling and of certain posters, and clear efforts to effect lounging of any threads associated with threads on CPZ, LTNs, parking. I wonder why now?

I also saw on the Nunhead thread on CPZ a resurrection of the 'frightened and cowed residents desperately in want of CPZ but too scared to say so' line. They ( if they actually exist at all) are already well represented as S'wark are set on a mission of borough wide CPZ and consultation is not public, so 'scared residents' just seems like another dubious tactic. 

It reminds me of the early days of ED CPZ when we were told residents were being stalked daily for parking slots by commuters. We also had extremely busy posters like pro cycling Rendel Harris (who disappeared pretty much once ED CPZ consultation was effected).

I also feel that the pro LTN/ CPZ narrative is shifting from pollution and more to the use of space for free by cars, when that space could be better used for other things. At the scrutiny session Cllr Rose used almost identical phrasing to that recently trotted out on this forum.

In the recent scrutiny session, there were also indications that S'wark will soon be going after wood burning stoves, gas hobs and even gas boilers...if they can. 

Edited May 15, 2023 by first mate

[mr.chicken]

51 minutes ago, Rockets said:

It very much is a deflection game

I'd just like us to pause and appreciate the irony of your comment. You've deflected a discussion on CPZs to be about the legitimacy of people you don't like holding opinions. But I'm deflecting from the deflection! Oh my pearls! [Clutch]. Clearly we should rip up the LTN and let drivers go to town (figuratively, because the traffic is too bad for it to be literal).

So, why not commit to an apology rockets? If your are as right as you and your fellows think you are, then it will never come to pass. You worried it might?  While I am the chicken, it appears you just might be one too!

[first mate]

Has anyone done the calculations on average cost to a one car household after imposition of a CPZ. That is residents permit, visitors short stay permit and then all day permits for building/ maintenance work?

If, as was suggested at the recent council scrutiny session, storage hangars will now be placed on streets for private hire companies, what will be the price of those? Will there be larger hangars to house private cargo bikes...at what cost?

I anticipate a future where instead of private cars, much of the street scape will be given over to metal bike hangars and hire cars. If private car ownership dwindles to nothing, the need for hire fleets will probably rise and they will have to be kept on street to be accessible.

If and when private car ownership dwindles expect there to be increasing charges for on street bike storage, the massive loss of revenue will have to be plugged somehow. 

[Rockets]

Just leaving this here with (for once ;-)) no comment:

https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/profile/35482-mrchicken/content/