Living on a suburban street and peacefully co-existing with all your neighbours is often easier said than done, especially when a dispute breaks out over something which nobody appears to have any ownership over.
This brings us to a bizarre conflict between the residents of a street in Brixton, south London, over flowers that had been planted at the base of trees and whether they should be picked or not.
The resident who initially planted the flowers became irked that they were getting taken by others and posted a polite note to the tree asking for the flowers to be left alone.
This then prompted an IRL Twitter argument to break out on the tree with a series of notes being posted on the tree about gentrification and if anyone actually owned the flowers.
The first note, which was written on lined paper simply said 'please don't pick my flowers. Thank you.' However, a more aggressive follow-up note accused the person of trying to take ownership of the flowers.
In an area massively affected by gentrification, it's sad to see people claiming ownership of even the flowers.
A pink post-it note then seemed to reinforce this statement, reading:
Flowers on the public pavement are owned by all the community, not just the house they happen to fall in front of.
A longer note then appeared underneath all of them and basically outlined how ridiculous this entire argument was. It said:
Are you serious?
This is not about ownership or gentrification, this is about someone trying to make the street a nicer place for everyone by planting flowers and people stealing them and stamping on them.
How can you try and justify that?
A message was then added to the final one, agreeing with the statement.
Totally agree. This was done with love and a spirit of community for heaven's sake!
The bizarre back and fourth was captured in a now-viral tweet by writer and Mashable culture reporter Rachel Thompson, with Twitter branding it as one of the most middle-class arguments they had ever seen.
Others shared similar disputes that they had found themselves in the past.
Anyway, back to the original argument and it appears that the situation had gotten so out-of-hand that the person who first planted the flowers had been forced to take them 'elsewhere'.
HT Daily Mail