[Discuss] points
Ian Manning
manning.ian at gmail.com
Wed Apr 21 22:15:28 BST 2010
With reference to Anne's follow up also,
I have personally had bbqs on Jesus Green many a time and have cleared
up after "myself" (by which I obvoiusly mean the group I was with) and
did not burn the grass. On the other hand I perfectly accept that there
are people who don't do this.
Could the City Rangers be asked to take this on perhaps? [the park
ranger role]
On 21/04/2010 14:13, Peter Constable wrote:
> Yes there really is disagreement. It is with your use of the word
> "responsible" . Can't think of any way this could be fairly interpreted.
> Peter
> On 21 Apr 2010, at 14:04, ian manning wrote:
>
>> Ok, well I don't think there is really disagreement is there?
>> I'm not saying we shouldn't discourage irresponsible bbqs, I'm saying
>> that we shouldn't ban all bbqs full stop. yes it will need
>> continuous policing, but i would rather that than stopping
>> responsible people from having fun.
>> VIE is the estate next to the riverside bridge (
>> http://vieresidents.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=56
>> <http://vieresidents.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=56> ).
>>
>> On 21 April 2010 13:44, Anne Garvey <annemgarvey at ntlworld.com
>> <mailto:annemgarvey at ntlworld.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Personal optimism is great. But to expect people to behave
>> reasonably has been shown to be sadly misconceived. Some will.
>> But those scorch marks all over the Green show you that many
>> won’t and again sadly they are the ones that leave the big brown
>> marks and spoil it for everyone else.
>>
>> There are limits to democracy. It’s surely about the greatest
>> good for the greatest number. People should not be able to
>> express freedoms by damaging the lovely scene for others surely?
>>
>> On balance you cannot check every single barbecue . I have tried
>> telling people they’re burning the grass but by the time they are
>> it’s too late and they don’t care anyway and just want you to go
>> away. I would rather \ the State’ told people not to do this
>> rather than people like me opening themselves up to ridicule and
>> abuse by trying to police the vandalism right in front of our
>> eyes. Isn’t this what we have a civil society for?
>>
>> Btw what is VIE?
>>
>>
>>
>> On 21/4/10 11:33, "ian manning" <manning.ian at gmail.com
>> <mailto:manning.ian at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> This all sounds rather conservative with a small c, and very
>> negative. It is a shame I didn't get a single reply to my
>> request for help, yet this thread with people generally
>> moaning and being negative gets so many replies.
>>
>> It is perfectly possible to have a bbq without damaging the
>> environment or disturbing other people - and no one should
>> have any right to stop reasonable people being reasonably.
>> Democracy is about each individuals right to express
>> themselves, not the state telling them what to do.
>>
>> Of course I agree that people not behaving reasonable should
>> feel the force of the law/enforcement.
>>
>> And, on your specific point Anne, yes I am an optimistic
>> person, I dont' see a need to apologise for that! :)
>>
>> Ian
>>
>> Ian Manning
>> Chair, VIE Residents' Association
>> http://www.vieresidents.org.uk
>> <http://www.vieresidents.org.uk/>
>> <http://www.vieresidents.org.uk/>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 21 April 2010 11:18, Anne Garvey <annemgarvey at ntlworld.com
>> <mailto:annemgarvey at ntlworld.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Good point on the barbecue spelling, shall adopt immediately.
>>
>> Booking a party on a barbecue site? A really good idea,
>> but that doesn’t detract from the very real Libertarian
>> problem. We are ruled by Liberal Democrats and their
>> emphasis is more liberal than demotic. It is hard to ban
>> things for them. Other countries, sites, parks don’t
>> share ( thank God) this aversion to telling people what
>> to do but our Council and its adherents and followers
>> still hope that people will just ‘do the right thing’ and
>> reminded that they shouldn’t permanently burn the grass
>> for the whole season will desist from so doing.
>>
>> People in the past would have fount this approach risibly
>> optimistic. And so do many citizens today. There is
>> nothing wrong I contend with introducing signs to remind
>> Green Users ( yes Simon I have just got the confusion in
>> a General Election) that there exists a ban on fires as I
>> prefer to call them, as barbecues are just as destructive
>> and you can’t have any smoke without either.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 20/4/10 20:08, "Simon Norton"
>> <S.Norton at dpmms.cam.ac.uk
>> <mailto:S.Norton at dpmms.cam.ac.uk>> wrote:
>>
>> > Sorry if it makes me seem pedantic, but "barbecue" is
>> not spelt with a Q. If
>> > it
>> > was it would be pronounced quite differently ! I regard
>> the abbreviation BBQ,
>> > which does suggest the correct pronunciation, as acceptable.
>> >
>> > Also, with the forthcoming general election, I initially
>> misinterpreted the
>> > start of the first message on this thread "the Greens
>> are being badly
>> > damaged..." (with a capital G).
>> >
>> > Now for a couple of more substantive issues. First, in
>> yesterday's Guardian
>> > there is an article suggesting that eating barbecued
>> food can cause cancer.
>> > Search for "barbecue cancer" on
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk <http://www.guardian.co.uk/>
>> <http://www.guardian.co.uk/>
>> >
>> > Secondly, I would have thought that most people would
>> want barbecuing
>> > facilities
>> > for parties rather than family meals. Could one
>> therefore introduce a booking
>> > system whereby people contacted the Council in advance,
>> saying where they
>> > wanted
>> > to hold the barbecue and roughly how many people they
>> expected, and the
>> > Council
>> > would then tell them whether there was anywhere suitable
>> that fit their
>> > requirements ? This would have the advantage of
>> eliminating the need for
>> > special
>> > notices. Bye laws would read something like "no cooking
>> unless authorised" --
>> > which I think is appropriate anyway because of the
>> number of special events on
>> > Midsummer Common (and other greens) where freshly cooked
>> food is sold (more
>> > pedantry !). I would expect that the Council would
>> impose some kind of payment
>> > for the facility, which should be refunded if the
>> weather was such that the
>> > barbecue had to be cancelled. Is this a feasible way of
>> doing things ?
>> >
>> > If this was agreed then SOS should ask to be consulted
>> as to what places would
>> > be considered suitable -- that is, assuming that the
>> answer isn't "none".
>> >
>> > Simon Norton
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > discuss mailing list
>> > discuss at soscambridge.org.uk
>> <mailto:discuss at soscambridge.org.uk>
>> > http://soscambridge.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/discuss_soscambridge.org.uk
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at soscambridge.org.uk
>> <mailto:discuss at soscambridge.org.uk>
>> http://soscambridge.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/discuss_soscambridge.org.uk
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at soscambridge.org.uk <mailto:discuss at soscambridge.org.uk>
>> http://soscambridge.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/discuss_soscambridge.org.uk
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at soscambridge.org.uk <mailto:discuss at soscambridge.org.uk>
>> http://soscambridge.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/discuss_soscambridge.org.uk
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at soscambridge.org.uk <mailto:discuss at soscambridge.org.uk>
>> http://soscambridge.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/discuss_soscambridge.org.uk
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at soscambridge.org.uk
> http://soscambridge.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/discuss_soscambridge.org.uk
>
More information about the discuss
mailing list