Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I don't think Amin is taking this seriously enough. Surely there can't be a more important issue to East Dulwich (generally) and Lordship Lane (specifically) than the genuine worries of the OP? You insult him sir with your "Lounged". A metaphoric buggy shove with extra toe crushing if ever I read one.

jobdone Wrote:

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

> Would anyone agree that it would be a great idea

> to have a couple of hours a day,(regulated),buggy

> free in lordship lane!Just imagine being able to

> walk freely along the pavement,go in to the shops

> without a buggy jam!Any buggy pusher flouting the

> 2 hour period would have thier buggy

> confiscated,(on the first offence),then, if they

> buy another one,a more severe punishment!What d'ya

> think?


_______________________________________________________



Ohh Blowjobdone



Great idea, can we all take Heroin then instead.




W**F

njc97 Wrote:

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

> http://gatsome.com/images/obvious_troll.jpg



Is it the one in the pink dress ( 2nd left & down a bit....that one .....there...there ....oh sod i see her anyway)



You lot are brill



W**F

thexwinglessxbird Wrote:

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

> Too right. Fed up of having my feet run over by

> people with buggies.

> Why does nobody ever say excuse me & just expect

> you to jump out of their path?


____________________________________________________


What & ruin our FUN ?



W**F

Clear off Steve Shaw you c_nt. If any one want's to, they can let Steve know what they think of him by visiting and posting on the forum that he owns/administrates with an unbelievable dose of paranoia and heavy handed censorship. I and others know that he's incredibly jealous of the success the EDF has had seeing as it's much younger than his stale old message board and he's even more pissed off at that members of his forum are drifting over to the EDF and also posting their discontent and dissilution on the Sydenham Town Talk forum.


Visit him and his gang of pathetic regulars here: http://www.se23.com/forum/


Anyway, back to the topic at hand...


The only time you ever really see an army of toddlers in buggies (we all travelled in one once remember, getting in the way of the ARP warden in some cases) is during the early afternoon on the weekend.

Will_i_am Wrote:

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


> Spikes on buggy wheels don't pay for themselves

> you know. My kid found your porn collection btw.

> Sicko.


Yeah ok very well. Now that it's safe to come out of the airing cupboard, can I have my laptop back please?

woofmarkthedog Wrote:

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

> thexwinglessxbird Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Too right. Fed up of having my feet run over by

> > people with buggies.

> > Why does nobody ever say excuse me & just

> expect

> > you to jump out of their path?

>

> __________________________________________________

> __

>

> What & ruin our FUN ?

>

>

> W**F



Either way. May aswell worn the yummy mummys of the forum before I kick one. Believe me, one unfortunate person wont be getting away with it...

thexwinglessxbird Wrote:


> Either way. May aswell worn the yummy mummys of

> the forum before I kick one. Believe me, one

> unfortunate person wont be getting away with it...


Good for you - that'll teach 'em! (I find meeting violence with violence is a sure way to calmer streets.)

Brendan get your facts straight before you post please. X was clearly saying that some of the yummy mummys who use this forum have no manners and deserve to be kicked. (Not the ugly ones, who don't use this forum, who I spose make up for their boot faces and lack of keyboard skills with good manners).

bigbadwolf Wrote:

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

> Clear off Steve Shaw you c_nt. If any one want's

> to, they can let Steve know what they think of him

> by visiting and posting on the forum that he

> owns/administrates with an unbelievable dose of

> paranoia and heavy handed censorship. I and others

> know that he's incredibly jealous of the success

> the EDF has had seeing as it's much younger than

> his stale old message board and he's even more

> pissed off at that members of his forum are

> drifting over to the EDF and also posting their

> discontent and dissilution on the Sydenham Town

> Talk forum.

>

> Visit him and his gang of pathetic regulars here:

> http://www.se23.com/forum/

>

> Anyway, back to the topic at hand...

>

> The only time you ever really see an army of

> toddlers in buggies (we all travelled in one once

> remember, getting in the way of the ARP warden in

> some cases) is during the early afternoon on the

> weekend.


I can't figure out how connection was made enlighten me

Its not really the buggies that's the issue. Its the SIZE of the damn things. Most people tend to buy, light weight little strollers for their babies, but because EAST D is a little bit.... LOOK at me, parents feel the need to buy these ?700 volvo versions of buggies.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Surprised at how many people take the 'oooh it's great it got approved, something is better than nothing' view. This is exactly Southwark council's approach, pandering to greedy developers for the absolute bare minimum of social and affordable housing. It's exactly why, under their leadership, only a fraction of social and affordable housing has been built in the borough - weirdly Mccash chose to highlight their own failures in his 'near unprecedented' (yet unbiased 😆) submission. All the objectors i have met support redevelopment, to benefit those in need of homes and the community - not change it forever. The council could and should be bolder, demand twice the social and affordable housing in these schemes, and not concede to 8 storeys of unneeded student bedsits. If it is a question of viability, publically disclose the business plan to prove how impossible it might be to turn a profit. Once the thing is built these sites can never be used for social or affordable housing. The council blows every opportunity, every time. Its pathetic. Developers admitted the scale was, in this instance, not required for viability. The student movements data seemed completely made up. The claim that 'students are taking up private rentals' was backed up with no data. There is empty student housing on denmark hill, needs to be fixed up but it's there already built. The council allows developers years to build cosy relationships with planners such that the final decision is a formality - substantiated objections are dismissed with wooly words and BS. Key meetings and consultations are scheduled deliberately to garner minimal engagement or objection. Local councillors, who we fund, ignore their constituents concerns. Those councillors that dare waiver in the predetermination are slapped down. Not very democratic. They've removed management and accountability by having no nomination agreement with any of the 'many london universities needing accommodation' - these direct lets MAKE MORE MONEY. A privately run firm will supposedly ensure everyone that those living there is actually a student and adheres to any conduct guidelines. There's no separation to residents - especially to ones on their own development. Could go on... We'll see how many of the 53 social/affordable units that we're all so happy to have approved actually get built. 
    • I am looking for 1 unit which is working for £50 cash. Thank you
    • Can’t recommend the company enough, great service. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...