They weren’t keen on William Burroughs and Henry Miller but didn’t stop me from reading anything.

‘Some doubt expressed’. 😂

Not only that, they’re even trying to blame Lambeth council for SEJ’s own ‘confusion’ (ie spreading of misinformation).

He has seems to have some very odd views, like ‘active travel’ doesn’t include walking, and cycle parking is bad for your teeth.

He's now blocked me for 'mocking' his suggestion that LIme bike parking causes a measurable negative effect on dental health in the area. 🤦‍♂️

I have to admit I don’t understand what he’s on about either. I think he wants Chris Boardman to campaign to save the local fishmonger. Or something.

Hurrah for the suppression of the voices of Neil and @jchermier.bsky.social, says Steve (Stella), who believes that all voices should be heard.

Making a point and politely supporting it with evidence is hardly ‘belittling’. This just suggests that, as the evidence continues to mount up against their dogged opposition to all traffic reduction measures, they find it harder and harder to have a fact-based discussion.

Mohammad? Abusive? Surely not.

‘Environmental’ campaigners who can’t even bring themselves to get behind the ULEZ.

Raise your game, John.

Come off it, John. The idea that he has any interest in ‘decent debate’ is nonsensical and you know it. He refuses to discuss anything reasonably and instead just relentlessly makes personal attacks and malicious false accusations.

Come on, John. If you really want to make 2025 less toxic you could start by cleaning up the act of your fellow SEJ founders. Ediz shows no sign of moderating his incessant personal attacks and wild false accusations.