Too Many Estate Agents - what about Betting Shops?

[Rachael]

He was in the Town Pub last night - maybe he's hiding?

[Pat Trembath]

So he was.

Maybe when he surfaces he will remember I'm still waiting for a retraction.

[Tim Lund]

Pat - lots of people do the left shimmy - you could probably find occasions when I've done it. I coined the term on the 'Does FH Soc want more affordable houses?' thread on SE23.com responding to a similar move from Michael. Take a lesson from him in how to respond. It does not imply a political bias - in fact 'shimmy' is meant to imply it's a move that is not really meant - and I'm very happy to scotch any suggestion that you have a discernible position on the ideological left / right political spectrum. In fact, I'm not sure that you have any political ideology at all, but that doesn't stop you being a significant part of the political context here in Sydenham.

All we can say here for sure is that on a point of detail, in an area where, as you say, you have been involved for most of those 40 years, you were plain wrong.

[marymck]

Pat - lots of people do the left shimmy - you could probably find occasions when I've done it. I coined the term on the 'Does FH Soc want more affordable houses?' thread on SE23.com responding to a similar move from Michael. Take a lesson from him in how to respond. It does not imply a political bias - in fact 'shimmy' is meant to imply it's a move that is not really meant - and I'm very happy to scotch any suggestion that you have a discernible position on the ideological left / right political spectrum. In fact, I'm not sure that you have any political ideology at all, but that doesn't stop you being a significant part of the political context here in Sydenham.

All we can say here for sure is that on a point of detail, in an area where, as you say, you have been involved for most of those 40 years, you were plain wrong.

Someone pass me a Babel fish. Please.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Pat Trembath]

I can't be bothered to read Tim's long spiel.

He is obviously not going to retract. He's so obviously right and, as usual, wants the last word on this subject. I shall let him have it - as he is so obviously right.

[michael]

Pat - lots of people do the left shimmy - you could probably find occasions when I've done it. I coined the term on the 'Does FH Soc want more affordable houses?' thread on SE23.com responding to a similar move from Michael. Take a lesson from him in how to respond.

To clarify, my response to Tim's posting where he accused me of shimmy and talking nonsense, was that I refused to debate the issue any further with him.
At the time, Stefan said:

you do sound like some disgruntled former chair of syd soc

And I responded:

There is of course nothing I can say that will satisfy Tim...
... with the only retorts repeated time and again being 'nonsense', 'wishful thinking', deliberately confusing issues, or debating tactics of some type, I am no longer prepared to continue this dialogue with Tim. Some people may think that I should have taken that decision a while ago, like the original post on this thread, but I generally welcome public discussion of such issues even when started in such a provocative manner.

I hope others on the forum will forgive me for now withdrawing from this thread and other threads of a similar non-specific nature on housing with Tim.

Once again on Friday, on this forum, Tim started trying to put words in my mouth, quoting my completely out of context to jump to a completely different conclusion, and attempting to discredit my position rather than argue against anything I was saying - fortunately I had better things to do than to debunk his posts. He seems determined to start fights with people at the moment, although possibly it is only with fellow past chairs of amenity societies. I can only assume that as we are currently furthest from Lent he is being deliberately obnoxious so that he can refrain from such behaviour next Lent, or is he going to get even worse over the next 5 months?

[Eagle]

Seems have a go at Tim day today.

Pat
You say cannot be bothered to read his long spiel. Unless I am mistaken it is 8 lines.

Michael

Calm down. Not good for anybody to get worked up.

Be tolerant to others. A good maxim for life.

[Tim Lund]

Once again on Friday, on this forum, Tim started trying to put words in my mouth, quoting my completely out of context to jump to a completely different conclusion, and attempting to discredit my position rather than argue against anything I was saying - fortunately I had better things to do than to debunk his posts. He seems determined to start fights with people at the moment, although possibly it is only with fellow past chairs of amenity societies. I can only assume that as we are currently furthest from Lent he is being deliberately obnoxious so that he can refrain from such behaviour next Lent, or is he going to get even worse over the next 5 months?

It might help your argument here if I link to that recent comment

You refer to 'past chairs of amenity societies' but the 'past' bit is not the point - both you and Pat are people who even now are widely - and rightly - taken as carrying authority locally when it comes to planning matters and Pat, I believe, is still the editor of the Sydenham Society newsletter. If it is agreed that the positions of local amenity societies matter, then there is a case for questioning them.

The fact that I was the chair of SydSoc gives me a particular insight into the role of amenity societies, and you know very well that I acknowledge their strengths - for example in swinging opinion behind the Sydenham Road improvements, and more recently all the amazing work being done by FH Soc. I'm obviously aware that when I do criticise them I will be accused of being disgruntled - well, that's life.

[leenewham]

Pinches of salt needed all round.

GROUP HUG!

[Tim Lund]

Pinches of salt needed all round.

GROUP HUG!

Well, I appreciate the sentiment, but there is a problem that should not be swept under the carpet, which is the legitmacy of Amenity societies as voices of the local community. I don't particularly question that they are, but it has to be legitimate to question what they say. Take Mary's article on the Kirkdale Masterplan in the latest SydSoc Newsletter, with its perfectly reasonable implication that something should be done about the eyesore opposite the Woodman. In the OP there I wrote:

How should a plan reconcile these roof lines? Will it mean the lower ones rising, or the higher ones coming down? In any master plan for Kirkdale, will there be any numbers given for housing densities?

, to which Annie responded

It would be better if they went up,that way more housing above and it would also smarten up the parade by all being level, just my opinion.

Quite, but just Annie's opinion - we still don't know what SydSoc's opinion might be. Do they want to increase or decrease the local housing supply, or to use more concrete language, do they want to make people homeless?

Of course Pat and Michael can here take their balls and go home, but they will continue to publish sometimes tendentious opinions in their newsletters, web sites, formal sumissions on planning applications and be included in the list of usual suspects in informal discussions. There's no question that they are in touch with local opinion, and generally what they say will reflect this, but it will not always, and even if it is, anyone who disagrees should be given a chance to change the consensus.

[michael]

Of course Pat and Michael can here take their balls and go home, but they will continue to publish sometimes tendentious opinions in their newsletters, web sites, formal sumissions on planning applications and be included in the list of usual suspects in informal discussions. There's no question that they are in touch with local opinion, and generally what they say will reflect this, but it will not always, and even if it is, anyone who disagrees should be given a chance to change the consensus.

or we take our balls to the next public consultation meeting to ensure that when we speak on behalf of amenity societies, we are generally representative of the widest range of opinions possible. Others always have the right to put their opinions, but not to misrepresent my opinions.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[G-Man]

Can we get back to the matter in hand which is the potential loss of a restaurant space on the High Street.

Is anyone objecting or has anyone objected and if so what have they said?

G-Man

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Tim Lund]

Moved to Kirkdale Masterplan thread

[Nigel]

Tim
I am beginning to worry about you :

we still don't know what SydSoc's opinion might be. Do they want to increase or decrease the local housing supply, or to use more concrete language, do they want to make people homeless?

How is that "concrete language " ? How could SydSoc wish to make anyone homeless ?
Similarly your " Cure for NIMBYism " thread - obviously NIMBYism is a construct based on the speaker's values .
E.g. if I railed against your Favella Free For All (high density housing with no interference from central government or local cartel) theory I would be a NIMBY - where as if you argued against a lap-dancing club in Mayow Park you would be a concerned resident .

Back to the thread - I would just add that you are doing more than most to call into question the intentions of plainly very well intentioned people. The machinery of government might be a hobby horse for you but I venture most people are grateful for others to put in their time and do their best- and I hope contribute where they can and are really not interested in the political structures -just what they do for the community .

When I last looked , " shimmy" was some kind of highly suspicious , not to say exotic , dance move .

A very good evening
Nigel

[Tim Lund]

Tim
I am beginning to worry about you :

we still don't know what SydSoc's opinion might be. Do they want to increase or decrease the local housing supply, or to use more concrete language, do they want to make people homeless?

How is that "concrete language " ? How could SydSoc wish to make anyone homeless ?

Well, let's see if the Kirkdale Masterplan which emerges increases or decreases the supply of housing. If it decreases it, then I'd say that was making people homeless. OK, they might wish today's working classes to move away to some where more appropriate for them, such as Stoke on Trent, where there are lots of houses, but let's hear them say that.

Of course it's outrageous to suggest they want to make people homeless, in the same way I'm sure they don't like the idea of people sleeping on beds in sheds, but if insufficient houses are built where people want to live, either this will happen, or else you will need some regime to check on where poor people spend the night.

To answer your question with another question, how can they not care about getting more houses built? Alternatively, Does the FH Society want more affordable housing? Michael's position on that is, I think, that there is no reason for them to have a view on this. OK, but if every neighbourhood developing its plan took the same view, and it just so happened that when the long term results were in, not enough houses had been built, would that not be a problem? Why should I not flag up the matter now?

Similarly your " Cure for NIMBYism " thread - obviously NIMBYism is a construct based on the speaker's values .

I think thread you mean was 'Nimbyism explained?', which was nothing more than a suggested explanation of the rise of the NIMBY. The nearest I have got to suggesting a cure was this, in the thread 'Message to homeowners from the Bank of England...'

NIMBYism is making unreasonable objections to development because it is in your immediate area. If you say it is a construct based on the speaker's values, then you are saying that it is impossible to make reasoned objective judgments about developments. I suspect many people would say it was, but if so, it also removes any justification for planning control, making of it just some post-modernist game.

On the matter of what we should feel about nimbies, this is what I wrote on the "Wutbürger" thread:

their causes aren't sinister, and nor are NIMBYs. But there is a bias which society as a whole should be able to deal with.

E.g. if I railed against your Favella Free For All (high density housing with no interference from central government or local cartel) theory I would be a NIMBY - where as if you argued against a lap-dancing club in Mayow Park you would be a concerned resident .

What I wrote in the Message to homeowners thread was:

Our planning system is not all bad, and I have no reason for wanting any other fundamental changes to it, which is why I think it is unfair to suggest I want a 'free for all'. My proposal was for planning departments which fail to meet targets to have their powers temporarily taken over by planners employed at a higher level, who would just as much take account of safety, design and any other planning matters. As far as I can see, this is the minimum reasonable step.

If I was Michael I'm sure I'd be accusing you of misrepresenting my views.

Back to the thread - I would just add that you are doing more than most to call into question the intentions of plainly very well intentioned people. The machinery of government might be a hobby horse for you but I venture most people are grateful for others to put in their time and do their best- and I hope contribute where they can and are really not interested in the political structures -just what they do for the community .

I do sometimes feel myself coming over all Marxist. The machinery of government really does affect us all, and it's worth trying to understand it. A classic Marxist text is Wright Mills' 'The Power Elite'. Happy to lend you my copy. There is more to be said from a more liberal standpoint, but let's leave that for this evening.

When I last looked , " shimmy" was some kind of highly suspicious , not to say exotic , dance move .

Well, I always thought it was just a quick movement to one side, as with a footballer shimmying past despairing defenders on the way to slotting the ball in the back of the net. I find this is only the second meaning in the online Urban dictionary; in my naivety I was quite unaware of any camp association.

[Tim Lund]

Can we get back to the matter in hand which is the potential loss of a restaurant space on the High Street.

Is anyone objecting or has anyone objected and if so what have they said?

G-Man

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

G-Man - Happy to move my last response to Nigel elsewhere, if that's ok with him. As to the potential loss of a restaurant space, I think it's fairly clear that raising objections at this stage will achieve nothing, and making a song and dance (shimmying?) about it is just grandstanding.

[marymck]

Can we get back to the matter in hand which is the potential loss of a restaurant space on the High Street.

Is anyone objecting or has anyone objected and if so what have they said?

G-Man

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

G-Man - Happy to move my last response to Nigel elsewhere, if that's ok with him. As to the potential loss of a restaurant space, I think it's fairly clear that raising objections at this stage will achieve nothing, and making a song and dance (shimmying?) about it is just grandstanding.

Yes Tim, objecting will achieve nothing NOW. It's a great shame that you felt you had to use this particular thread for another of your grandstanding attacks. You have managed to derail an important thread, to the extent that the deadline for objections of midnight on the night of 2nd September has now passed. If the restaurant is lost, I think the betting shop shoud be named in your honour. Or is it that you have shares in Paddy Power?

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[dickp]

Why did I never become involved in the Sydenham Society committee structure?

Because of this bollox - bitchy internal politics. Been there, done that. Not again, thanks. I'd rather take the dog for a walk.

Please shut up, all of you.

[Rachael]

Is it internal politics, though, or external agitation? (To be clear I'm not taking ANY sides on this, and external agitation can be a good thing if done right, I just don't know if this thread or the Kirkdale one reflect what goes on INSIDE SydSoc.)

[Robin Orton]

[youtubes]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzWYybidPn4[/youtubes]