Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Frankito Wrote:

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

> Oi Meds, your thread on Less is More has just been

> nominated by me as a piece of unpolished turd.

>

> Get in here.


I already nominated him for that Frank and he ignored it - this makes the whole naughty room null and void and you can leave now.


(the key is under the dead cat by the window)

maxxi Wrote:

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

> Frankito Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Oi Meds, your thread on Less is More has just

> been

> > nominated by me as a piece of unpolished turd.

> >

> > Get in here.

>

> I already nominated him for that Frank and he

> ignored it - this makes the whole naughty room

> null and void and you can leave now.

>

> (the key is under the dead cat by the window)


maxxi, no one seconded your proposal thus I didn't ignore it. So the Naughty Room is still very valid. Fancy a stay?

The 75/75 rule was originally proposed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as an alternative means of testing the bioequivalence of two formulations of a pharmaceutical agent. The rule specified that the ratio of test-to-reference formulation of a bioavailability measure arising in a bioequivalence study must be between 75 and 125 per cent of unity in at least 75 per cent of subjects to declare two formulations bioequivalent.


Eat that. ;-)

Frankito Wrote:

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

> I said 73 first

>

> I seconded Maxxi so what next..?


You're obviously NOT going stir crazy given your droppings are all over the place like that of an unwanted mouse, so what are you talking about?

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

    • I can't access the article - what's the gist?  I took the markets getting jittery when she was crying at PMQs to be a sign that they trusted her. But maybe it was because they were simply worried about any form of instability.  The NIC hikes have stymied the economy, which we could all see a mile off. Will a wealth tax improve things? Does anyone here think the trickle down has any impact and that chasing out the super rich will help things? Or are we just seeing off the biggest contributors to the economy? And has the Kwasi approach ever worked anywhere else?  Economics is not my strong point at all, I'd love to know others' opinions, but it seems to be she has few options, especially as the party is so divided. 
    • does either of them have a surgery? probably not over summer, but I thought they had to give the opportunity for their constituents to meet them.
    • MaryT, I’ve contacted the Dulwich Hill councillors several times in recent years, always copying them both in. I have never had an acknowledgment from Jon Hartley (not even an automated response or out-of-office) nor had any response or engagement from him regarding the issue raised.   On each occasion, only Maggie Browning responded (she uses an out-of-office if she is away). The last time, I received no response from either for 3 months, until Maggie Browning emailed me to apologise for not responding and asking if the problem had been resolved.
    • The  Kwasi effect is being considered. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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