text:
eLearning Avatar Templates
Avatars are useful in eLearning courses as guides that introduce you to a course and experts that give you tips throughout. Weve created templates that leverage these two functions. Best of all… the templates are created in PowerPoint, so its easy to swap out characters, change text, and modify colors to fit your instructional needs. Combined with our 30,000+ character images and you have lots of options!
Browse newest products from this category
Showing all 6 results
Avatar Template – Tip Popup 1
Avatar Template – Chalk Board
Avatar Template – Quiz Interaction
Avatar Template – Guide with Thought Bubbles
Avatar Template – Guide with Speech Bubbles
Avatar Template Illustrated Character
Showing all 6 results


text:
February, 10-13, Richmond, CA: CODEX International Book Fair 2013
CODEX International Book Fair 2013
Sunday – Wednesday, February 10-13, 2013
"The first biennial CODEX International Book Fair took place in February of 2007 on the campus of the University of California, Berkeley. Since that time this biennial book fair has grown into the most significant book event of its kind. This year, over 175 of the world's most distinguished book artists and artisans, private presses, and fine art publishers will be exhibiting their art and craft.
Multi-day: $25.
Single-day: $10.
Student(with ID): $10 (multi-day)
About CODEX
The Codex Foundation exists to preserve and promote the hand-made book as a work of art in the broadest possible context and to bring to public recognition the artists, the craftsmanship, and the rich history of the civilization of the book.
Book Fair Location
The Craneway Pavilion
1414 Harbour Way South
Richmond, California [map]

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Take cover by Martin Pickard
Street Photo on UPSP
Urban Picnic Street Photography | Street Photographer Community
#upsp #streetphotography #streetphoto #streetphotographer
Birmingham • English • rain • UK
Martin Pickard has published 60 street photos in UPSP.
Urban Picnic Street Photography
A place to find inspiration, upload your best photographic work and develop ideas based on the street theme. Urban Picnic strives to showcase the best street photography and feature the best contemporary street photographers.


text:
Hushpuppies started as delicious cornmeal fritters called croquettes de maise. The name hushpuppy came about when an old Creole cook was frying a batch of catfish and croquettes. His hungry dogs began to howl in anticipation of a chance to savor some of the catfish. The innovative Creole instead tossed a few of the croquettes de maise to the dogs and yelled, "Hush, puppies!" The name has since been associated with this cornmeal delicacy.
Preparation time: 15 minutes
Cooking time: 3 minutes
Yield: 6 to 8 servings
1 cup self-rising flour
1 cup self-rising cornmeal mix
1/2 teaspoon salt
1 teaspoon sugar
1 egg
1 cup buttermilk
1 bunch green onions
In a cast-iron deep fryer, preheat the oil to 375 degrees F.
Combine the flour, cornmeal mix, salt, and sugar in a mixing bowl.
In a small bowl, beat the egg.
Add the egg and 1/2 cup of the buttermilk to the mixing bowl.
Mix to a stiff batter.
Chop the green onions.
Stir 1/2 cup onions into the batter.
Add more buttermilk a little at a time until the batter is well mixed.
Let stand for 10 minutes.
Drop the batter by spoonfuls into the hot oil and fry until golden brown.
Per serving: Calories 266 (From fat 139); Fat 15g (Saturated 1g); Cholesterol 28mg; Sodium 617mg; Carbohydrate 27g (Dietary fiber 2g); Protein 5g.


text: All KITSCH accessories are PLATED. The below are a few recommendations in extending the longevity of your jewelry items. REMEMBER, anything plated will eventually turn with time and wear. The more frequent you wear the jewelry the quicker the plating will fade. AVOID MOISTURE. This one is tough but avoid swimming, sweating, lotions, sprays and high humidity. Certain people perspire more than others when doing daily tasks or working out. Perspiration fades plating especially when the damp skin rubs against metal. This is our most common cause of wear with our customers. If you do find you spent some time in your jewelry where it was exposed to moisture immediately take a very damp cloth and gently wipe clean. REMOVE AT NIGHT. Sleeping with played jewelry isn't advised as nigh sweat and extra rubbing against the skin are two of the main reasons why plating fades. STORE GOLD WITH GOLD AND SILVER WITH SILVER. The different metals will create a chemical reaction that causes each other to tarnish, fade and/or turn colors when stored together. Two separate air-tight containers would be a good option for storage. Air tight to avoid exposure to humidity specially if you keep your jewelry in the restroom which is not ideal as it things plating. DO NOT CLEAN WITH CHEMICALS. Chemicals will break down the plating and do the opposite of what you are trying to achieve. Fine jewelry can handle the chemicals, but plating is very delicate and should only be wiped with a clean dry cloth.


text:
Space Invaders Attack the iPhone
Taito, the venerable arcade gaming company, announced that an iPhone version of Space Invaders is now available in Apple's App Store.
The 31-year old game works on the iPhone and iPod touch, and makes full use of the motion sensor and other iPhone 3G and iPod touch input methods. The company said that the "Nagoya Attack" technique and other tricks present in the original game work in this version. There's also some bundled bonus content, including a behind-the-scenes look at the original game's development cycle.
Sadly, Midway Games (not Taito), the original distributor of the Space Invaders arcade game in the U.S., filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy last month, and is now considering the sale of all intellectual property related to its Mortal Kombat franchise in order to survive.
Space Invaders for the iPhone costs $4.99 and is available now in the App Store.


text:
Subscribe To Tron 3 Gets A Writer, Franchise Future May Depend On Your Kids Updates
I've already subscribed
Work on a sequel to Tron: Legacy is underway. We've known it was coming for awhile, but today Disney announced that they've hired David DiGilio to work on the script. Adam Horowitz and Adam Kitsis wrote the previous film, but have moved on to writing a fairytale show called Once Upon a Time for ABC. If you saw Tron: Legacy, you know this is good news.
It's good news because for all its charms, if there's one, glaring problem with Legacy it's the movie's script. The story was weak, it never really worked, and even Disney sort of agreed since they brought in the team from Pixar at the eleventh hour to write addition scenes for reshoots. The amazing thing here is that Disney was originally going to bring Horowitz and Kitsis back, and that they didn't go out and find another right from the start. Things have worked out for the best, one way or another.
The thing is that even though Disney has started work on the Tron 3 script, they may not be entirely committed to making it. THR says that whether or not they keep moving forward may depend in part on how well the upcoming, Disney XD, animated series Tron: Uprising does when it debuts on television next year. That seems like a strange way to gauge this thing, since the show is on a channel that no one over the age of 13 really watches, while the feature films were geared towards an audience of much wider age groups.
As for whether DiGilio is up to the task of fixing the problems started by Horowitz and Kitsis' script, your guess is as good as ours. He's only ever written one feature, the better than you'd expect family movie Eight Below. Does the fact that Disney's basing the production of Tron 3 on whether or not a kids cartoon does well, and then hiring a guy whose only experience is in writing a movie for kids, indicate that Tron 3 will be crafted to appeal to an even younger demographic than the first one? Maybe that's not a bad thing, if it keeps them away from slathering the whole thing in more, endless, sort of boring corporate intrigue again. I'm pretty sure kids don't care about stock prices. Let the worrying begin.


text:
"Should I" and similar "opinion" question threads go here. If you don't get any replies it's not because no one sees it, it's because no one cares.
|Dark lords of Darkness - statistics
|Slip's Music Database (CMS v166: Corona Festival)
|Rules and Regulations [UPDATED: 2014-09-15]
|[KMS]Inkwell Diary # 72 - Night Walker skill preview
|NXPatcher - Create your own pre-patcher & list of Maple FTPs
|MapleStory KMS Winter uptate-ARK(아크)
|Check Out the MapleStory Art Corner!
|GMS Server Status Discussion
|[1.2.321] Skill Balancing - Edelstein & Leben
|Check Out the May 3rd Art Corner!
|KMST 1.2.10 - Skill Changes
|Check Out the June 13th Art Corner!
|Guide to Southperry IRC
|KMST 1.2.508 - Skill Changes and General Enhancements
|Beast Tamer discussion thread


text:
by Jake
Robocop Costume Photo 5 of 10
Rate this costume:
12 votes
|add a comment
More views: (click to enlarge)
|Costume type:
|Costumes for Kids
This homemade costume for kids entered our 2014 Halloween Costume Contest.
A word from Katrina, the 'Robocop' costume creator:
We have always collected movies and movie memorabilia, but we especially love the old cheesy 80's movies. Our five year old daughter, Livi, has watched some of these cheesy movies and has her own Robocop,... Read more »
Similar costumes:


text:
'Celebrity Apprentice' Recap: Patricia Velasquez Fired After Aubrey O'Day Cries
Aubrey O'Day's crocodile tears saved her for another week! When is this girl's luck going to run out?
Move over, party girls! The men's team, Team Unanimous, won yet again on the March 25 episode of The Celebrity Apprentice. Despite the guys assuming they were at a disadvantage initially, they managed to pull the job off — and they had a good time doing it! The one person definitely not having a good time after this week, however, is Patricia Velasquez.
This week's task: Throw a fun launch party for Crystal Light's new line of mocktails.
The girls from Team Forte thought they had this one in the bag with project manager (and self-proclaimed party girl) Aubrey O'Day leading the pack. Their Garden of Delight theme used to advertise Crystal Light's Pomtini as a no-longer-forbidden fruit, thanks to its five calories impressed the execs — just not enough.
Clay Aiken led the men in throwing a beach bash called "Life's A Beach" for their drink, the Peach Bellini. Though none of the men on the team are party animals, they threw a great bash. Their rendition of "Under the Boardwalk" that got every party guest singing and limbo-ing was exactly the kind of fun atmosphere Crystal Light was looking for!
The board room turned soggy very fast with both Aubrey and Lisa Lampenelli shedding tears. Aubrey's waterworks definitely worked on Donald Trump though, considering he handed over $10,000 to her charity — despite her team losing!
Aubrey was quick to point out how invaluable she is as a member of Forte. Both she and Teresa Guidice put Dayana Mendoza on the chopping block, even though it was Patricia Velasquez's poor branding that lost the task for them. Lisa didn't let The Donald forget that, though! When Dayana, Patricia and Aubrey returned for the final outcome, a cat-fight ensued. The three women never forgot to remind each other how amazing they thought they were after each insult, however.
The men gawked in the back room at the women's inability to cite Aubrey as the problem — considering they have lost the majority of tasks under her creative leadership. Thank goodness for her fiery spirit, admired by all three Trumps, or she could have been cut. Ultimately, it was Patricia's mistake in not plastering Crystal Light's logo all over everything that made Team Forte lose, so she was fired.
It's unfortunate that the women finally felt united on this task only to still lose — but hey, at least Aubrey knows her crocodile tears will work!


text:
In which issues concerning the profession of philosophy are
bitched griped about
Friday, December 11, 2009
For the dudes: you should wear either a suit or a jacket/tie/nice pants combination. There are always the objections about how paying attention to how people dress is superficial and stupid and not at all important. To those people I say, adults display their respect for their interviewers and their interest in the job by dressing up for interviews. Adults who don't dress up for interviews display a lack of interest and respect. Aristotle says we are political animals. Be political.
You can, of course, spend as much as you want on a suit. Macy's is a good bet for expensive suits. Men's Wearhouse is cheaper, but I find that their suits look exactly like they came from Men's Wearhouse. Nevertheless, my suit is from Men's Wearhouse. Make sure it fits you.
Finally, a tip. Wear your interview outfit as much as possible between now and the APA. Practice. I always see guys around the hotel who are obviously extraordinarily uncomfortable in their weird, unfamiliar clothes. The key to being comfortable in a suit is being accustomed to wearing it, and the only way to do that is to wear it. So wear it. Now.
--Mr. Zero
50 comments:
As someone who recently served on a hiring committee for the first time, let me suggest this. Wear a suit that fits you well; that is more important than the cost of the suit (though, as I learned when I bought my first proper women's suit jacket, there is some sort of fitting miracle that often occurs between price points). Nothing is more obvious than an ill-fitted suit. Seriously. Wearing an ill-fitting suit makes one look like a child playing dress up. If you are incompetent to do this yourself, enlist the help of someone who knows how to dress professionally and well, and take their advice seriously.
I was once advised by my father, who worked his way up from peon to exec in the corporate world, and now runs three of his own businesses in retirement, that one should always, always, always wear a nice (not necessarily expensive, but nice) watch. He suggested that even though most people purport not to care or notice, it is something people notice unconsciously and that bears on how a person is perceived. In his experience, a bad day for someone in the boardroom was strongly correlated to that person's not wearing a watch.
I don't know if this is good advice or not. It sounds totally irrational, anyway. But I have always worn a nice (but not necessarily expensive watch), and I have always been able to get a job, and almost always I have not been the most qualified person for those jobs. So the family myth continues.
- December 11, 2009 at 8:56 AM
That is absurd. I'd say that assuming your interviewers will judge you by your clothes shows a lack of respect. Luckily, they can't be sure that's the reason you're wearing a suit.
On the other hand, assuming they don't care about your clothes entails a good amount of respect. The problem is that many of them don't deserve that respect and don't think there's anything wrong with judging a person by their clothes, and it is these people that fuck it up for everyone.
What's next, wearing a t-shirt to teach undergrads displays a lack of respect for them? Or do they not count as 'adults'? Or is it that they can't fire you if you they don't like the way you dress? I'd guess it's this last one.
As usual, society looks down upon any kind of non-conformist tendency, even if it's completely harmless. Yet I bet nearly all the people who judge a person for not wearing a suit to an interview have read On Liberty and don't make the connection.
- December 11, 2009 at 9:05 AM
"A nice watch?" Are you fucking serious? Are we philosophers or CEO's? The hard-core correlation between "wearing a watch and getting a job from an interview" just made my otherwise shitty day.
- December 11, 2009 at 9:21 AM
Anon 9:05,
I strongly encourage you to wear a t-shirt to your interviews. Please. Do it.
- December 11, 2009 at 9:27 AM
Ignore 9:05. The rest are all very good tips: Get a suit that fits, and practice wearing it.
A watch is optional, since you'll have a long-sleeved shirt and jacket, so your watch won't show. Unless you're doing jumping jacks. But if you wear one, make sure it's a nice one.
- December 11, 2009 at 9:31 AM
Another dynamic here is location/context. My older sister has a good sense of style (especially for *her* lifestyle) and has often outfitted me with good clothes. The problem is that she lives in Europe now and is prone to give me clothes (especially shirts or ties) that would make me look pretentious interviewing or teaching at random state college. Even in the minor big city of Boston, where I currently live, fashion tastes in academia and among students tend to be rather dowdy (yet also more formal than in other parts of the US).
So, take the advice of fashionista friends or siblings with a grain of salt!
- December 11, 2009 at 9:52 AM
Regardless of what you think about conformity, it's a psychological fact that most people will judge you more qualified, a better fit, more intelligent, etc. if you look put together. There's been a number of studies that show it's not just a certain kind of person who judges you by your clothes-- it's almost everyone. Furthermore, if you know it's the convention to wear a suit and choose not to wear one, that would say to me that either you're not serious about the job (because why wouldn't you do everything in your power to look like the kind of person they're psychologically inclined to look for?) or you have a very high opinion of yourself. Either way, it's a couple hours of your life, and if you buy a good-quality, basic suit, it will last for many, many years (through anymore interviews, and other occasions that may require a suit: weddings, funerals, etc).
- December 11, 2009 at 9:55 AM
Anon 9:05: dressing in a suit for a job interview is hardly infringing on your liberty to dress as you please. No one is telling you that you cannot dress as you please at APA or anywhere (so long as your attire does not harm others -- so no ammo belt and fully loaded Uzi).
The issue is how your dress conforms with widely recognized meanings of different kinds of attire. Your tie-dye shirt and cut-off short shorts might float your boat, but they do not signify respect or decorum. A suit does. You can compare this to the way language functions. You might have your own idiosyncratic language. In your language, saying "fuck you" and flipping the bird to the search committee might signify your great esteem for them. But they are not going to recognize that meaning in your utterance.
Since the suit is widely and easily recognized as adult, job-seeker attire, signifying respect and a desire to be taken seriously, a suit is a good idea if that's the message you wish to convey. But you can still wear your tie-dye shirt and cut-offs if it really pleases you, and pretend that they mean something (e.g. you're a rebel and an iconoclast) that they just don't mean.
- December 11, 2009 at 9:58 AM
Women should not wear suits. Period.
Jacket and skirt combo is ok, but never pants and jacket. They come aross as unfeminine and lose points for that (think Hillary Clinton).
If the search committee is interested at all in hiring women, it's not because they can look and act like men, but because those women will be comfortable as women and bring all those feminine charms to the table.
A nice sweater, maybe a collared shirt underneath, skirt/pants, and nice and confident shoes (e.g., black boots) is always a hit. Please, don't look like an amateur interviewing for a job right out of college in a suit she's clearly never worn before.
- December 11, 2009 at 10:07 AM
On the scale of what matters, what you wear isn't anywhere near the top. If it makes you feel better about your chances to worry about this, worry away. If, instead, you want to focus on what matters, spend your time researching your interviewing schools, writing a paper, ringing the bell for the Salvation Army, knitting....
All you need to know about dress is this: don't look like a moron.
- December 11, 2009 at 10:19 AM
1. Wear a suit. I spent years in a suit, working with people in suits, and interviewing people in suits. Wear a suit for the reasons outlined by others above. Here's another reason, which should appeal to your vanity: you will look good in a suit. Seriously, the man's suit (possibly the woman's as well, but I'm less certain about it) has survived and become standard among the vainest people in the world (politicians, business people, lawyers) because it looks good on people, and can be chosen/tailored to flatter them / hide their flaws. (Note: this assumes that it isn't falling apart, dirty, or ill-fitting.)
2. No one actively judges candidates on the basis of their clothes, except in extraordinary cases (e.g., the clothes are so distracting that they can't be ignored). But surely we can all agree that even reasonable, good-willed people are affected subconsciously; that's where dressing nicely comes in. If you really believe that it shouldn't matter, or that it only matters to people who aren't worth working alongside, then by all means wear whatever you like. Seriously, go nuts. Also, teaching undergrads in a tee shirt does show disrespect.
3. I wouldn't advise Men's Wearhouse as a first inexpensive choice; Jos. A Banks is a bit better, and their stuff is always (I mean that literally) on sale. I believe that at the sale prices they are comparable to MW. They also tend to have pretty good people on hand who can help with fit / advice / and tailoring. Anon at 8:56 gets it exactly right w/r/t to ill-fit. Way better to buy a cheap suit and spend 50-100 bucks on tailoring than to spend an extra 50-100 bucks on quality. Stick with navy or charcoal solids or very faint patterns (e.g., nails head or stripe). Solicit the help of the people in the store regarding size, fit, style (pleats/flat front, 2- or 3-button, regular or tall, etc.)
4. Other stuff matters. Buy a white shirt and a light blue shirt (you'll interview over two days, right?). Make sure that the neck is not too tight or too loose. (again, get help from the salesperson). Wrinkle-free versions at J. Banks are quite good. Two conservative ties from Marshall's, thrift store, or dad. Learn how to tie it so that it. Get a decent pair of black dress shoes. Wearing your doc martins with a suit looks weird. Wear dark socks (preferably that match your pants). Black belt. Always wear a white t-shirt under your dress shirt. No one wants to see your nipples and/or chest hair.
5. I also agree with the OP's suggestion to wear the suit several times before the interview. Go to dinner, go shopping at the mall (people will just think you're a business person).
6. This probably seems like a daunting list; it is more money to spend. I wish it were free. However, some of the stuff you'll use over and over (fly-outs, weddings, funerals, etc.) Also, though it seems a little daunting, the suit is liberating: you just put it on, and don't worry about choosing the right outfit.
7. Good luck.
- December 11, 2009 at 10:38 AM
(I'm the far-along junior prof who commented on the earlier "smoker do's" post; I have a good job and I hire into a good job)
Re. 10:07 -- You're completely wrong.
Women should wear suits. Most do, and those that don't look like they're unwilling to go to the trouble of buying a suit. You should wear a suit that you look good in. If you're a woman, you should feel beautiful in your suit. Not overly sexy or anything, but beautiful. For the record, there are plenty of well-cut pants suits that women look great in and that don't remotely look like the women are trying to be men. And as I said earlier, you can wear a brightly colored shirt or blouse with the suit.
Re. 10:19: because of all the ample psychological data on the way that how we present ourselves affects others' perceptions of us, every job candidate *should* take the time and money to obtain a suit in which he/she looks good. You're right "don't look like a moron" but the only way to do that is to wear a suit.
- December 11, 2009 at 10:38 AM
Anon 10:07:
Should I be sure to smile and giggle too? And get my hair and nails done beforehand? And defer to men in conversations, all the better to showcase my 'feminine charms'?
Stop being such a misogynist; it makes you sound like an idiot.
- December 11, 2009 at 11:13 AM
It explicitly came up for us once that one candidate was improperly dressed for his job talk. Maybe you think this shouldn't matter. But consider: getting what you want in academia (e.g. tenure, additional lines for your department, jobs for your students) often involves getting along with people and skillfully navigating the social world, and not dressing appropriately is a sign that you can't figure out social norms or that you're too self-righteous to follow them.
Also, you don't want to look like a grad student. You want to look like a future colleague. And putting on a suit helps with that -- it helps you look like a professional and it reminds you to act like a professional.
Finally, I agree with 10:38: suits for the ladies, too. Some can be purchased with both a skirt option and a pants option: if your flyout is in the north in February, you might want to be wearing pants. If you are worried about feeling too masculine, buy a shell or blouse to go with it rather than a shirt with a collar (alternatively, women's clothing stores like Ann Taylor make button shirts without collars that look great under suits).
- December 11, 2009 at 11:28 AM
The thing about women wearing suits to an academic interview is this: Unless you're applying for a dean's position, everyone knows that you will not be wearing a suit on a regular basis on the job. Some men do, but I have yet to see a female jr. professor do that.
So it comes across as political and disingenuous when a woman presents herself in such a way that's far removed from how she actually is or we know she will be.
Be yourself, but clean up a bit. Men who are totally uncomfortable in suits can get away without one, but you still need to look professional or business casual. If you must wear tie-dye or unusual colors, confine that personality to your tie.
- December 11, 2009 at 11:29 AM
i have one suit and one nice watch. but coming from a background of unreasonable wealth, both are *extremely* nice. i can't help but feel that in that getup, i don't look like someone who ought to be groveling for the kinds of jobs i'd grovel for.
still, i'd sure feel ridiculous buying a cheaper suit and watch so i'd look poorer in interviews.
which bullet should be bit?
- December 11, 2009 at 12:11 PM
- GP said...
FWIW (3 interviews @ Eastern APA last year with one fly-out... though to be fair, my current TT job isn't any of these!):
I wore a brown pinstripe pantsuit from Marshall's to one of my interviews, and a gray pinstripe suit jacket/skirt combo from Fashion Bug to the other two (and uncollared shirts with both). I felt perfectly neutral: my clothes weren't anything to sneeze at, but they were unremarkable, which is (I think) exactly what you want. This is about philosophy, right?
Though one other data point that's worth noting: for my current job's on-campus visit, I wore an aquamarine sleeveless shell with black cardigan & black skirt the first day for my teaching demo, and a black shell with aquamarine skirt the next day for my talk. So... who knows.
- December 11, 2009 at 12:14 PM
I've been on both sides of the interviewing fence a number of times. And yes, when young and worried, even I started out in a suit. Now I know better.
The only good advice here is not to look like a moron. Or, more to the point, look smartly dressed. But it needn't be a suit. Really, no-one gives a shit. Just look well put together. Wear whatever you would wear to a nice dinner at a decent restaurant. If that's a suit for you, cool. If it's some nice pants and a good shirt, terrific. If it's smart jeans and a sports coat, excellent.
As long as you are well put together and dressed smartly, folks won't notice, and they don't care.
Anon 10:38, like a few others, tells you to wear the suit to get used to it. The point here is slightly off: you want to be comfortable in what you wear. If that's a suit, so be it, but if it isn't, get comfy in something smart. As noted, in wearing this new suit " (people will just think you're a business person)." Hmmm. I wonder why? Is that b/c that's what business people wear to work. Oh my, yes it is. So guess what you should wear to an interview to be a CEO? Yup, a suit. (And a nice watch too?!!!)
But this isn't the business world. Some folks teach in suits, the rest don't. If you are they type who teaches in a suit, interview in one. If not, don't.
I don't teach in a suit, and I don't interview in one either. And no-one ever gives a shit about it.
Consider: dress for the interview as you would for the job. Guess wat truck driver's don't wear to interviews? Yup--suits. Is this a lack of respect? No, because it's out of keeping with the job. Our job can go suit or no suit, and so can you.
But dress smartly, because that's how you should dress to teach. And can the suit (buy some clothes you'll wear out to dinner and look good in).
And just because you'll all still worry. The clothes have never once come into the decision (no, not even at a hidden level).
- December 11, 2009 at 12:14 PM
- Mr. Zero said...
The clothes have never once come into the decision (no, not even at a hidden level).
This is my favorite kind of comment.
- December 11, 2009 at 12:18 PM
Even assuming a couple of answers were not meant seriously, one conclusion seems to be that you're liable to fail someone's test no matter how you dress. So this is rather like questions about formatting CVs: there are rules that are more often followed than others, but few absolutes.
My take is to feel comfortable or you'll flub the most important parts of the interview: talking philosophy, being coherent, appearing confident. As long as you don't stand out too much, you'll probably be alright. If you've got the personality to match, dressing eccentrically might help you, but otherwise don't stand out too much from the pack. If you've been to APAs before, get an image in your mind of the grad students who looked confident in the interview room, form a composite, and dress like that.
As a general rule for men: blazer, full-button shirt, tie, nice slacks, and dress shoes are the norm. Smart jeans or leather jacket would work if this fits your style, but then you'll be remembered for this. I'd say get everything properly pressed, make sure your fly's zipped, and you're good. With a well-starched shirt the tie might even be optional. That's the minimum. Beyond that, your choices send cues about your personality, upbringing, and values. So dress isn't unimportant, but there aren't a lot of strict rules. Oh, do shower and shave.
I'd suspect the rules for women are similar. Your choices will still send clues about who you are: things like big, dangly earrings, lots of skin, or fancy shawls all attract attention, though in all cases most men aren't going to know how to interpret them. The safest choice is just to wear nice, clean, pressed clothes unless you want to stand out, but beyond that I doubt what you wear matters much.
I'd hire someone in a gorilla suit if the interview and teaching demo went really well, but that's just me. . . . No, on second thought, maybe I wouldn't.
- December 11, 2009 at 1:55 PM
Maybe Mr. Zero is being sarcastic, but I basically agree with "Ha!" @ 12:14pm.
I suppose I can't tell, really, whether clothes ever came into anyone's decision in my department; I only know it's never been mentioned. But nobody, NOBODY in my dept. wears a suit. Deans wear suits. Yeah, some older professors in other departments do wear them, but nobody in philosophy (here). It would not bother me even a tiny bit if a guy turned up to an interview without a jacket or tie. If you came in torn jeans, I guess I'd wonder if you were trying to make a statement, but even that wouldn't really bother me.
I understand the urge to want something, anything, that's actually under your control, to matter. And maybe it does at some places. But not in my department, and it sounds like it doesn't matter to 12:14, either.
Oh, and the idea that a woman in a suit looks too masculine and hurts her chances strikes me as absolutely ludicrous.
- December 11, 2009 at 2:00 PM
I'm going to attempt to amplify and formalize something that has been said by a few people on the thread, which goes against what many people have been saying.
Way too many commenters have been proposing a false dichotomy between wearing a suit and wearing a tiedye with cut-offs. This is silly. Dressing for an academic interview in philosophy probably calls for a slightly spiffier look than one would sport as a prof teaching undergraduates, depending on one's views on how to dress for teaching. That does not mean a suit is required.
Way too many commenters have asserted that being under-dressed for an interview could result in being subconsciously judged, while somehow wearing a suit leaves one completely immune to this. Actually, even a well-fitting suit can result in subconscious judgment. You're being interviewed by philosophers. They will have strange views on all sorts of things. Given that suits are fairly rare in classrooms, by wearing one you're indicating that you may not know how to dress appropriately for academic situations. It's better than under-dressing, but will only be optimal if you happen to get interviewers who are subconsciously looking for deference.
Anon 10:38 has the wrong idea. Suits have won out as the standard man's fashion because almost anyone who is vaguely symmetrical can look OK in one, and many powerful people (particularly those in late middle age who have not taken care of themselves) can look good in little else. It also relates to the strong "any man who doesn't completely conform in the way they dress might have sex with other men" undercurrent that defined American male heterosexuality until recently. If the latter is what you're trying to deal with (in terms of subconscious judgment), a suit is not necessarily a safe choice anymore.
So: wear a suit if you're not confident that you can't dress as a professor would when attending a slightly-more-formal-than-usual social function. That lack of confidence, and therefore the suit, might be completely justified in many or most cases, but it's silly to suggest that a suit is the primary or even preferred choice. It may even be that, just as with an application to grad school, there is no one perfect choice. The horror.
- December 11, 2009 at 3:16 PM
Anon 10:38 here.
I don't follow this:
It also relates to the strong "any man who doesn't completely conform in the way they dress might have sex with other men" undercurrent that defined American male heterosexuality until recently. If the latter is what you're trying to deal with (in terms of subconscious judgment), a suit is not necessarily a safe choice anymore."
As near as I can tell, you're saying that by wearing a suit, a man might be trying to avoid giving interviewers the subconscious impression that he has sex with men, but that wearing a suit is no longer a safe way to do that. Fair enough, I guess. But so?
You might also be saying that successfully looking like you don't have sex with men might be a negative. Perhaps.
I don't want to be dogmatic or claim that there is a single optimal choice. The stuff I said in my earlier post is for the vast majority of male grad students/early career philosophers on the job market, who I believe would do well to dress in a suit. Most of these people (rightly, in my view) haven't given much thought to how they dress in these kinds of settings. They--like I did in grad school and do now in my current academic position--dress very casually. But now they have to dress a lot better for the interview, and I think that the easiest way to do that such that one gives oneself the best chance of having the interview really be about substance is to wear a suit.
If someone has a pretty good sense of self and style, and can present him- or herself professionally in some other attire, or not be overly hetero-normative, or whatever, great. Seriously, I like interesting dressers. Most male philosophers are not like that, though.
The more likely mistake, and the one I really hate to see because some of my male colleagues have made it (though I of course cannot say that it cost them jobs), is dressing really badly. Ill-fitting pants, black shoes that look like basketball shoes, collar very loose w/ tie pulling it shut, small sportscoat, and whatnot.
Also, I don't quite get this:
That lack of confidence, and therefore the suit, might be completely justified in many or most cases, but it's silly to suggest that a suit is the primary or even preferred choice.
If the suit is completely justified in many or most cases, isn't it the case that the suit is the primary or preferred choice?
- December 11, 2009 at 4:11 PM
I don't understand what all the fuss is about -- just be yourself, a suit or whatnot is fine, or even unwashed jeans and a pizza-stained shirt is fine. After all, we are Philosophers, not Lit Crit types, and the goal of the interview is to divine your intellectual qualities not your fashion sense.
Of course, if you're a woman you should dress up nice. No one likes a frump. But no one respects a slut, either, so don't go crazy. You shouldn't be too businessy, either, because a suit - especially one with pants - can make people think you're some kind of power-hungry bitch. So basically what works is an outfit that signals the right mix of smart, sexy, assertive, easygoing, fun, modest, charming, unthreatening, and available. Also, don't be too tall.
- December 11, 2009 at 6:03 PM
There are a ton of helpful comments on what to wear to an interview that I don't have yet. So I'm going to look really nice sitting home alone, perhaps despressingly drunk, on December 27th. Fuck.
- December 11, 2009 at 7:37 PM
From Anon803:
Yeah, Jesus would wear some nice comfortable and clean piece of clothing, such as a robe or kimono. But wait, everyone used to bring their slaves with them to important meetings - what if you need someone to fetch something for you during your interview, that's one of the great things that slaves used to do for their owners. Not bringing a slave to your interview is a sign of disrespect: bring at least one or two, maybe three, slaves with you to your interview - it shows that you take the interview seriously and that you want to express how seriously you take the interview.
Of course, this was a horrible argument for bringing, not to mention having, a slave anywhere two hundred years ago. It is just as horrible an argument today either for bringing slaves to interviews or for wearing suits to interviews.
Virtually everything I have read here on wearing suits is so institutionalized - it seems as though people do not realize how much they are rationalizing the perpetuation of stupid and perverse social norms that perpetuate all sorts of regretful and backward social phenomena, such as obedience to authority, etc.
Why aren't more people rallying support for wearing ordinary, clean, comfortable clothing to interviews?
The expectation for a male to wear a suit has the same motivation and moral status as the expectation for a woman to wear a long dress - with the difference being that gender stereotypes about clothing have harmed women much more and in more ways than men. The point, however, is the same.
Do you think the bankers did not give Ben and Jerry a loan to build a factory to manufacture more of their ice cream when they wore t-shirts, jeans, and dirty sneakers or roller skates to their loan/investment banker meeting?
We need more people like Ben and Jerry.
I contend that we can get jobs and impress search committees with our credentials and not with our clothing. Stop selling out. You've all been duped. Suit jackets and ties are incredibly outdated, inefficient pieces of clothing. Are most people too hoodwinked to see this?
- December 11, 2009 at 9:33 PM
9:33 -- Let's grant that the suit is all a bunch of instutitionalized mumbo-jumbo and there's nothing objectively good about it. (Although I don't see how the comparison to the slave thing is apt: having slaves is morally wrong, are you suggesting that so is wearing a suit?) Still, to break the institutionalized expectation requires that someone buck the system. Are you telling the least powerful people in the profession --- the grad students going out on this year's job market --- that bucking the system is their job?
- December 11, 2009 at 10:52 PM
Here's why a very nice suit is not always best. What does it say? Well, that you are willing to play ball. Is that always good? Not necessarily. Imagine that the folks interviewing you don't want someone who they might perceive as too admnistrative. That can happen, and I suspect it does a lot. No one wants a slob, but a lot of philosophers also don't want a colleague who strikes them as a potential administrative chronie. Much of this will depend on the history of the department that a candidate doesn't know about. But the very nice suit is not always best and it can make you seem far too 'corporate' to a search committee full of philosophers. It is one thing to play the game, it is another to play it too far and come off as that crappy administrative type that no one (well almost no one) likes.
- December 11, 2009 at 10:57 PM
- Sam Page said...
This is the first year since 2003 that I have not been on the philosophy job market. I don't miss it. My "permanent" position was terminated last year and I am protesting by taking care of my kids and thinking about alternate careers. Best of luck to all of you on the market.
- December 11, 2009 at 10:58 PM
Guys, suits or not, avoid pleated front pants *at all costs*. The man who looks good in that was not yet engineered. It is an atrocity. Please.
- December 12, 2009 at 2:20 AM
Anon 9:33 wrote,
"it seems as though people do not realize how much they are rationalizing the perpetuation of stupid and perverse social norms that perpetuate all sorts of regretful and backward social phenomena, such as obedience to authority, etc."
But is this the reason we wear them (or generally distinguish dressing formally vs. informally) now? I think not. You're right that how we dress is determined by social norms, but it's precisely for that reason that certain modes of dressing communicate something. It communicates respect. I'd feel the same if the group interviewing me was sitting around in cut up jeans, ratty t-shirts, unshaven, looking like shit. It's a 2 way street here. So I don't see any "obedience to authority". Anyway, what are the supposed "all sorts of regretful and backward social phenomena" that are being perpetuated here besides "obedience to authority". And what's wrong with authority, for that matter (in principle, mind you)?
- December 12, 2009 at 4:54 AM
Anon 9:33.
1. It is only appropriate to bring one's sex slave to an interview if the AOS is in 20th century philosophy with a focus on Foucault.
Here are some other helpful fashion hints specific to philosophy positions:
2. Togas and sandals are more than appropriate for Ancient positions, although one should always make sure to sit properly when interviewing in said toga so as not to show of one's olive branch or goat's gruff. Drinking hemlock during the interview to show one's devotion to Ancient thought is frowned upon.
3. It is only appropriate to wear a suit of armor when interviewing for a Medieval position.
4. Those philosophers specializing in Modern philosophy do wise to wear a powdered wig if they specifically focus on the work of philosophers of the 18th century. If working on anyone following Kant, it is best to forgo the wig, but wear knickers.
5. Philosophers of science should always wear lab coats over a shirt and tie. Pants are optional. Those working in philosophy of medicine may do the same, but to wear a stethoscope around one's neck is a bit much.
6. What to wear if you're a feminist philosopher depends upon what wave you ride.
6a. First wave feminist philosophers should simply smoke cigarettes during the interview. This shows everyone who has the power!
6b. Second wave: Do not wear a bra. DO wear comfortable pants or jeans. Shirts are optional.
6c. Third wave feminists often benefit from wearing black leather, which should always include gloves. Spiked collar optional. Fake mustache optional.
7. Philosophers of economics, as well as business ethicists, should dress in a similar fashion to the Monopoly man.
8. Wittgenstein scholars should dress exactly like Wittgenstein.
9. Those philosophers who specialize in American philosophy, especially pragmatism, should definitely wear suits, but all elements of the suit should be wrinkle-free. If a suit is unavailable, these philosophers should opt for a tuxedo t-shirt and black jeans.
10. Philosophers of language, epistemology and metaphysics should dress like lemmings.
- December 12, 2009 at 5:28 AM
Why aren't more people rallying support for wearing ordinary, clean, comfortable clothing to interviews?
It's a question of power. If you think there's a chance the interviewers care, you might wear a suit just to play it safe. It's one thing to support it, another to do it. I'm years away from interviewing, but I'd bet a higher percentage of male candidates wear suits than of male interviewers. Can someone confirm or disconfirm this?
- December 12, 2009 at 6:13 AM
You wear a suit to the conference interview because it's an interview for a white collar, professional job.
The "But I won't wear a suit at work" argument is specious. There's no presumption that you would. Do you think surgeons wear scrubs to their interviews? Do you think experimental scientists wear lab coats?
When you get your fly-out and have to do a teaching demo, then you can dress (on the nice side of) how you think you'll be dressing in the job.
- December 12, 2009 at 6:45 AM
The last 10 yrs, I've sat on 2 search committees for the philosophy dept, 2 for the college of law, and a search committee for a Dean (College of Humanities).
How you dress is important, don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
I work at University where a majority of the faculty dress business casual (think the LL Bean catalog or Kohls).
But for the interview, not dressing right can hurt your chances and for some reason, women do a much better job of dressing than men professionally in academia.
For men, as mentioned in previous post, make sure the suit fits well - spend a little extra to get the suit altered so it looks good on you, if you're a size 46L, don't buy a size 44. Wear the suit a few times before the interview and get comfortable in it. If you never owned a suit, look at the suit styles on the Lands End catalog.
You won't get a TT track position just based on what you wore to the interview, but dressing casually isn't good - remember during the interview process you're evaluating us and we are evaluating you - at the same time during the interview process on campus you never know who you who you'll be meeting on campus - one more than one instance when we've had a candidate who really stood out, I made it a point on short notice to invite the VP for Faculty or an Associate Dean to meet with the candidate, this is a good sign - and believe me, you want to make a good first impression.
As an administrator I'm looking at every faculty hire beyond their academic credentials- In terms of salary I'm spending about $400,000 on a new hire for the first seven years before tenure. This cost includes salary, benefits, professional support (i.e. travel) etc. - I'm looking at such variables as, contributions to the university and community at large as well as your talents as an academic. Is this someone who in a few years I might want to invite to the president's sky box during a football game to take part in a meeting with a donor? Is this a candidate who I want representing the university to a community group? Is this a candidate who is going to get involved with the life of the university?
In today's brutal economic environment, a faculty candidate must be a good investment for the campus as a whole as well the philosophy dept.
- December 12, 2009 at 6:55 AM
I want to second Anon 10:19am's advice (along with the second Anon 12:14pm and Anon 9:33pm): "Don't look like a moron." Isn't there enough job-market insanity without adding haberdashery-induced neurosis to the mix? And whatever you do, don't worry about your shoes: no one is going to be looking at your shoes. As someone wrote on this blog (or Philosophers Anonymous) last year, if you're going to focus on anything, get a decent haircut: your interviewers will be spending their time looking at your head.
The idea that not wearing a suit indicates that you're not serious about the job or are a raving egomaniac strikes me as ludicrous. Ties are nice, but does anyone really think that you're going to get because you wore a sport coat and an open-collared shirt as you otherwise nail the interview? Maybe I'm deluded, but I just can't believe that...
- December 12, 2009 at 7:12 AM
Anon 4:11:
I said:
That lack of confidence, and therefore the suit, might be completely justified in many or most cases, but it's silly to suggest that a suit is the primary or even preferred choice.
You asked, rhetorically:
If the suit is completely justified in many or most cases, isn't it the case that the suit is the primary or preferred choice?
I suppose "primary" is vague here -- I have to admit I'm not entirely sure what I meant by it. "Appropriate" would have been better. By "preferred" I meant preferred by the interviewers, or preferred generally by interviewers of prospective academic professors. So in that sense, their preference does not follow from the candidate's justification.
More generally, I'm saying that a suit is an appropriate default choice for someone who doesn't know any better, because it is a default choice in the wider society, so it will at least suggest effort, if not knowledge.
A JD/PhD said:
As an administrator I'm looking at every faculty hire beyond their academic credentials- In terms of salary I'm spending about $400,000 on a new hire for the first seven years before tenure. This cost includes salary, benefits, professional support (i.e. travel) etc. - I'm looking at such variables as, contributions to the university and community at large as well as your talents as an academic. Is this someone who in a few years I might want to invite to the president's sky box during a football game to take part in a meeting with a donor? Is this a candidate who I want representing the university to a community group? Is this a candidate who is going to get involved with the life of the university?
1) You are likely not spending any money on the candidate, your institution is. Salaries don't generally come out of the pockets of administrators. Your language suggests the icky self-entitlement all too common to your kind.
2) Would you dare screen scientific candidates this way, or do you just rely on how much grant money they'll pull in? I hope you're not at a research university, as you're apparently willing to screen based on traits like chumminess that should only be relevant to a small percentage of faculty (not much room in those sky-boxes). This is quite distinct from service, of course, which can be provided in a variety of ways.
3) Of course you have a law degree ...
- December 12, 2009 at 7:44 AM
Oh, and on this:
It also relates to the strong "any man who doesn't completely conform in the way they dress might have sex with other men" undercurrent that defined American male heterosexuality until recently. If the latter is what you're trying to deal with (in terms of subconscious judgment), a suit is not necessarily a safe choice anymore."
To which you (anon 10:18) said:
As near as I can tell, you're saying that by wearing a suit, a man might be trying to avoid giving interviewers the subconscious impression that he has sex with men, but that wearing a suit is no longer a safe way to do that. Fair enough, I guess. But so?
I am pretty much saying that, but the context is a bit more complicated. Primarily what I'm saying is that there being a single rigid standard of dress for men in recent history is related to this factor. In many European countries, if a guy finds a hat he thinks he looks good in, he can just wear it, it's not a big deal (not necessarily any hat, but a wide variety of hats). In the US, a hat choice will have to be pre-screened based on the degree of "friendly" harassment from friends it is likely to illicit, with that harassment mostly relating to whether it makes you look gay. If you don't think a great deal of male heterosexual culture continues to revolve around this sort of thing, I think you're crazy. (The strange thing is that if the hat-wearer turned out to actually be gay, it would be pretty much fine with a lot of these folks. But that's still how the culture works.)
However, larger cultural changes have broken down some standards of fashion, so wearing a suit doesn't automatically trigger subjective impressions of "normalness". Depending on the person, you'll look normal or abnormal. It isn't likely to be held against you in the moral sense, but it might be in the epistemic sense. Of course, other people will expect you to wear a suit, just because of the occasion. People are different. It's complicated.
- December 12, 2009 at 8:01 AM
Anon 6:13am:
but I'd bet a higher percentage of male candidates wear suits than of male interviewers. Can someone confirm or disconfirm this?
Well, I was on the market some time ago (more than a decade ago), and since then I've seen only my own colleagues at interviews, so my sample of interviewers is smallish and biased. But from what I've seen, yes, the percentage of interviewees wearing suits is much, much higher than the percentage of interviewers wearing them.
The JD/PhD administrator guy seems to live in a completely different academic world from mine, by the way. Very alien. Our administrators have virtually nothing to say about whom we hire, and if they had any they would be much more interested in whether the candidate could bring status to the university than how she or he dresses.
- December 12, 2009 at 8:46 AM
I've been on the hiring side of the table twice and, as a woman, I couldn't tell you if most men were wearing suits or nice slacks with a sport coat. It would, however, been the rare man who wasn't wearing a coat and tie (though as long as he was wearing something that was nice and looked as if he cared that we thought something positive about him it wouldn't have mattered).
My vague recollection is that most women *don't* wear skirts but, instead, nice slacks and a blazer, but, again, this is only a vague recollection. If you are not used to wearing skirts or dresses, then don't do it just for the interview.
Those of us hiring don't expect you to have really dressy wardrobes; we certainly don't. We are interviewing lots and lots of people (as many as we can fit in while we're there) if you are going to stand out in our mind because of your attire, at least be conscious of the impact you could be making and err on the side of caution (what that means to you, you'll have to decide).
We are fundamentally looking to hire a colleague who is going to be a good teacher, add to our department and be someone we will enjoy spending most of our waking ours with.
- December 12, 2009 at 10:03 AM
Put me in the 'don't look like a moron' camp. All you want to do, really, is not stand out. Otherwise, just dress in a way that you feel comfortable with, physically and psychologically. If putting on a nice suit makes you feel more confident, terrific, go ahead and wear one; you'll be fine. But if you prefer slacks and a sports jacket, no problem. I'd probably put on a tie, myself, but I think that a nicely ironed, non-stained, open-collar button-down shirt would be OK if that floats your boat.
Jeans would be a mistake. So would a daffy duck tie. The 'dress as you'd teach' standard is too lax; I teach in t-shirts or flannel shirts, depending on the weather, but interviewing in that getup would be inappropriate.
- December 12, 2009 at 10:10 AM
Will these people tell me what the salary is in the interview?
- December 12, 2009 at 11:02 AM
No! Do not ask about salary. That's not even determined with the administration until they are ready to make you an offer.
- December 12, 2009 at 11:45 AM
"In today's brutal economic environment, a faculty candidate must be a good investment for the campus as a whole as well the philosophy dept."
I just want to teach and do research
- December 12, 2009 at 12:15 PM
- Matt said...
Always wear a white t-shirt under your dress shirt. No one wants to see your nipples and/or chest hair.
This really is important, especially if you're wearing a white shirt. Many white shirts can be seen through and you'll look like a gross slob if you don't have on an undershirt. Also, if you're nervous, a bit warm because of your jacket, and sweating, an undershirt helps keep you from pitting out. Many of the other bits of advice seem optional to me- shirt color, etc. But this is important (and cheap.)
- December 12, 2009 at 1:08 PM
as a member of a search committee, I've found the following also to be quite important.
Be good-looking and charming. We don't want to look at ugly, awkward people. Neither do our students. Be socialable and communicative, polite and respectful and at the same time outgoing. Have lots of personality and be able to put on display in the most appealing way! Also, be warm and modest. Avoid any display of common vices.
If you can pull that off, wearing a jacket, slacks and a tie (for the boys) is good. That way, we won't notice what you are wearing.
With that out of the way, can people please help me? I don't know what to wear in the interviews. I want to wear jeans and a collared shirt, but I feel like it's unfair to the candidates we are interviewing by dressing down. On the other hand, I don't own a suit.
- December 13, 2009 at 12:53 PM
A lot of these responses surprise me. I'm curious how many of the people in the "Men must wear suits or they look unprofessional so NO JOB! and Women must wear skirts or they look like lesbians so NO JOB!"-camp actually come from philosophy or if they are working in some other humanities field or are (like "a JD/PhD") administrators at heart.
I'm also pretty surprised to hear things like "If you wear a T-shirt to teach undergrads you're being disrespectful" or "Wear a nice watch".
I always thought that philosophy was more like physics or (maybe) math in the way dress was considered. That is, you're taken less seriously the more dressed up you are (other things being equal-ish), at least when giving a talk or something like that (I don't know about job interviews).
The idea, as I understood it, was that if you had to dress well to win your audience over, then you're ideas weren't good enough to impress your audience on their own.
That's not to say that dressing like a slob is a good idea on a job interview. Though I would think that a job candidate who was obviously going out of their way to dress to impress might arouse suspicion about their confidence in their own philosophical ability, but I could be way off the mark (or, as someone else already said, they might look too much like a super-corporate administrative-y douchebag, and then nobody except JD/PhD would hire them).
Certainly not looking like a moron is the best advice (I think someone said to dress as if you're being taken out to a nice-ish dinner and want to look appropriately dressed and grateful. This is a good idea. Though, it might be better to dress like you're being taken out to dinner immediately after you had to work (teach etc.), so wear something that wouldn't look out of place in either setting.).
Of course, if you're interest isn't really philosophy but rather chumming around with white-haired potential donors, then you better start looking through some watch catalogs.
- December 13, 2009 at 1:15 PM
I was at the APA last year as a job candidate. Here is what I saw:
It seemed that 90% of the male job candidates were wearing (matching) suits. The rest were wearing a coat and tie.
It seemed that 75% of the women were wearing (matching) suits with pants. Perhaps 20% or less wore (matching) suits with skirts. The rest didn't match but still looked nice, with either a jacket or a nice sweater.
If you want to blend in, it seems better to blend in with the other job candidates. Granted, this means you may not look like the interviewers look, but of course not--this is a situation with a power differential and the onus of formality is on you. They don't expect you to wear what you wear teaching. This is a job interview. It's a big deal. You show your seriousness by dressing up. If you've never been to the APA, you may be surprised at how formal it is compared to philosophy in general. Even some interviewers dress up when they otherwise wouldn't, as a show of respect to the job candidates.
- December 13, 2009 at 4:38 PM
I do think there's something in the suits-for-women-are-a-bit-wierd line of thought. Very few professional women wear suits, so they do look more formal.
For my last interview I wore a nice, tailored grey suit and a collared shirt. I got the job, but I looked like a banker, and I ended up taking off the suit jacket before going into the interview, because it felt like a bit much. Since then, i've discovered a range of outfits that make me feel like a grown-up academic, not a management consultant. They usually involve a well-tailored pair of trousers, and a nice sweater (a black turtleneck, while not something I gravitate towards, seems to give the right level of conservatism - I'm blonde and curvy, and anything that downplays this seems good). I think I'll give this a go at the APA, unless I walk in and feel hideously underdressed, in which case I'll run straight back to the power suit.
- December 15, 2009 at 7:31 AM
I have always dressed in a gimpsuit for my now very many philosophy job interviews
- December 15, 2009 at 8:02 AM


text:
Autism Speaks Walk is powered by the love of people with autism and the parents, grandparents, siblings, friends, relatives and providers who support them.
With every step you take and every dollar you raise, you help enhance lives today and accelerate a spectrum of solutions for tomorrow.
Voices of Autism Speaks Walk
We Walk because...
we know the funds raised help improve the lives of individuals with autism, not only for my daughter - but for everyone.Find your Walk Share Your Story
- Stanley & BNY Mellon Pershing Walk Team
I Walk for ...
all the possibilities and answers that research can unlock.Find your Walk Share Your Story
- Melissa, Wisconsin
We Walk because ...
of Jake … and to raise funds in support of all the other amazing children like him.Find your Walk Share Your Story
- Jake-Man Team, Florida
I Walk for...
our son, Hudson and to raise funds because research, advocacy, services, and acceptance are key in the lives of families with autism.Find your Walk Share Your Story
- Lisa, Florida
I Walk for...
my son Sawyer and to raise awareness, give support and provide encouragement and funding to help all the millions of amazing children and their families.Find your Walk Share Your Story
- Jan, North Carolina
We Walk...
and fundraise so that other families who have loved ones on the spectrum will have the courage to seek early diagnosis and to ensure their loved one a bright future that is filled with abundant progress.Find your Walk Share Your Story
- Janet, Georgia
I Walk to...
raise money for training and awareness in hopes of making the world a more understanding place for my boys, AJ and Asher.Find your Walk Share Your Story
- Megan, Wisconsin
I Walk for...
my son Nick, and to raise funds to help all of the "superheroes" fighting the autism battle.Find your Walk Share Your Story
- Scott, Florida
I Walk for...
my twin autistic sons, Oliver & Xavier and raise funds to help them have the best future possible.Find your Walk Share Your Story
- Jason, Florida
Video Highlights
Why We Walk
What Drives Us
What Makes Us Unique
How We Help
*Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) prevalence estimates are for 4 years prior to the report date (e.g. 2016 figures are from 2012)
Support Your Family and Friends as They Raise Money for Autism Speaks Walk


text:
Moderator: Cartographers
natty_dread wrote:Yeah I'm not set on what I intend to do with the capitals. However, I'm planning on keeping the gameplay of this map pretty close to standard. I've been doing lots of maps with complex/experimental gameplay, and this is a change of pace, back to the roots sort of thing here.
Victor Sullivan wrote:Every game will have players retreating to the smaller bonus areas at the beginning...
natty_dread wrote:Definitely add mountains. I just haven't decided on the exact locations (there are so damn many mountains to choose from!)
Anyway, Croatia at least needs some border reduction, maybe Bosnia too...
Dukasaur wrote:make everything impassable except where the river valleys (or on the coast, the sea) makes a passageway.
theBastard wrote:just one question: why not to do Yugoslavia map from Civil War?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users


text:
Ask the Critic: NYC's 'Grill Your Own Dinner' Restaurants
You have restaurant questions? We have answers. Where to take a dinner date? Restaurants good for parents or picky eaters? Food etiquette? Food and restaurant writer Carey Jones answers your questions. Email [email protected] to submit.
Editor's note: Here to answer your questions is senior managing editor, former SENY editor, and frequent author of our NYC restaurant reviews Carey Jones. We'll take a few of your questions each week and give you the New York restaurant advice you're looking for. Email [email protected] with the subject line Ask the Critic to submit your question!
Grill Your Own Dinner
My girlfriend and I love the kind of restaurants where you cook your own food, specifically anything with a tabletop grill. I guess it's the interactive part that we find really fun. Any ideas? I'm sure there are great choices in the outer boroughs but I'd love any Manhattan ideas especially.
Do you like pork belly? Do you like pork belly drippings on kimchi? How about the idea of cooking on crystal? If you're nodding, head to Hanjoo, in Flushing, Queens if you're so inclined, or to their East Village location since you wanted Manhattan recs too. While the menu is extensive, it's really the pig you're here for. Go for a pork combination platter and you'll have a thick quartz slab erected on your table, heated by a gas burner, and a plate of raw pork brought to you. Drop each slice on the hot crystal and watch it sizzle, as the fat runs down and collects in the kimchi at the bottom. Eat one slice in a time, wrapped in a perilla leaf if you choose, and save that pork-saturated kimchi for the end.
While Hanjoo may look a bit pricey on first glance, a combination meal is easily enough for two; and as in so many Korean restaurants, it's served with an array of free banchan, no sides or apps really necessary.
If beef's the thing, you couldn't do better than Takashi. The classy but quirky West Village restaurant (you can't miss the cartoon blackboard sketches) specializes in yakiniku, tabletop grilled beef, and their offerings are remarkable. Inclined to try the cow's third stomach, or grill up some intestines? Have at it—but their more conventional offerings are incredible too, including the short rib kalbi, tongue, or cheek. With its friendly service, sharp aesthetic, and great roster of appetizers (and a killer soft-serve for dessert), it's also just a great date spot by any standard.
But there's plenty more fun to be had in the outer boroughs, namely Queens. Hop the LIRR to Flushing if you'd rather not spend an hour on the 7 train, but then take your pick: fabulous kalbi at Mapo BBQ in Murray Hill, Queens, where the short ribs are lightly marinated, deeply marbled, and cooked on glowing coals in front of you. Pork belly fans will love Tong Samgyeop Gui—spot it by the slightly-too-cute pig cartoons out front—where the super-rich pork grills along with bean sprouts and kimchi. (Get some fried rice at the end of your meal and cook it on your already pork-glistening grill). Or opt for one of our Korean Flushing expert's new finds, Kang Ho Dong Baekjeong, a Korean barbecue spot opened by a comedian, where you'll make a meal of slushy chilled soju, incredible cuts like pork collar, and a ring of raw egg around the grill, which slowly cooks as it absorbs the smoky, porky flavors around it.
Ask Us!
Email [email protected] with the subject line Ask the Critic to submit your question. All questions will be read, though unfortunately not all can be answered.
All products linked here have been independently selected by our editors. We may earn a commission on purchases, as described in our affiliate policy.


text:
The Grand Prize winning submissions for 2007 are,
The large group that submitted the EVA Project are students of Instructor Gaviraghi, Instructor Giminez and Instructor Ramos of the Liceo 4 de Maldonado School in Maldonado, Uruguay. [2-minute interview in Spanish]. Pinta was created by the students of of Instructor Secilir of the Robert College School in Istanbul, Turkey. M. Cristinel of Ovidius High School in Constantza, Romania is the instructor of the students that submitted the project APIS. Congratulations to all of this years participants for such outstanding research projects.
Note: for the rest of the prizes there were individual, team (consisting of 2-6 students) and large group awards for two groups: 6-9th grade and 10-12th grade. Team names are listed by submission.
Contest home page


text:
Drinks & cocktails with pineapple
The pineapple is also known as ananas, which in Tupi means "excellent". As excellent as fresh pineapple is, it's sort of hard to peel. Use a sharp knife! (Trivia 1: The surface of all pineapples are based on Fibonacci numbers. Trivia 2: Pineapples can weigh up to nine pounds!)The leaves of the pineapple make nice, yet inedible, garnish.


text:
Recent News
June 17, 2010
Heat, humidity can create health risk at any age
Missouri Summer Safety Week highlights prevention
The heat and humidity that often mark summertime in Missouri can create a health hazard for people of all ages, state health officials warn.
While the very young, the elderly and the chronically ill are at greatest risk of heat-related illness, summer temperatures can take a toll on healthy young and middle-aged adults, too.
Of the 11 Missourians who died from heat-related causes last year, eight were 25 to 64 years of age. Only three were age 65 or older.
Missouri Summer Safety Week, June 20-26, highlights measures Missourians can take to prevent heat-related illness and death. Between 2000 and 2009, there were 214 deaths in Missouri from heat- related causes.
"High temperatures coupled with high humidity can cause health problems quickly and with little warning," said Margaret Donnelly, director of the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services. "Summer Safety Week reminds us of the precautions we need to take to protect ourselves and others, especially those who are particularly vulnerable to the heat."
The elderly and the chronically ill perspire less and are more likely to be taking medication that can impair the body's response to heat or that make them more sensitive to the heat.
Those medications include antihistamines, over-the-counter sleeping pills, antidepressants, heart drugs, antipsychotics, major tranquilizers and some medications for Parkinson's disease. People should check with their doctor or pharmacist to find out if their medications make them more sensitive to summer's high temperatures.
Seniors citizens on fixed incomes often do not have air conditioning or feel they cannot afford the extra expense of running it. Since many seniors live alone, Missourians should check on elderly family members and neighbors regularly to be sure they are not suffering from the effects of the heat.
Donnelly urges Missourians to use the state's toll-free abuse and neglect hotline at 1-800-392-0210 to report senior citizens or adults with disabilities suffering from the heat and needing assistance. The hotline operates 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. seven days a week.
Young children are also sensitive to heat and must rely on adults to regulate their environments to prevent heat-related illness.
Infants and children should not be left unattended in hot environments, especially in cars, even with the air conditioner running. A car's interior can reach oven-like temperatures in minutes, putting anyone inside at risk of overheating. Children also should not be allowed to play in or around cars. Small children can become trapped because they are not big enough to open the door or roll down the window to get out. They also can fall asleep inside a hot vehicle or play or hide in the trunk of a car.
Children also can become dehydrated very quickly. Small children often do not drink as much liquid as they should and can become dehydrated. Adults need to encourage children to drink plenty of fluids every day.
Symptoms as modest as dizziness or muscle cramps can be signs of heat-related illness. For more warning signs and ways to treat the heat, visit www.dhss.mo.gov/Hyperthermia/HeatPrecautions.html.
To locate a cooling center near you where seniors and other people at risk of heat related illness can go to cool down, visit www.dhss.mo.gov/coolingcenter2010.pdf.


text:
Marriage in a Recession: Solve Your Money Problems
If you're having marriage problems thanks to the economy, you're not alone. Here's how to keep financial worries at bay and cure your money woes.
The chatter never stops: If it's not the awful unemployment figures or the continuing home foreclosure crisis, it's advice on how to slash your spending or fix your 401(k). And if you're like most couples, too many financial discussions end up heated, personal—and counterproductive. "I've never seen this level of anxiety and insecurity about money in my 25 years of practice," says Michele Marsh, PhD, a Philadelphia therapist. "Even couples who are doing okay worry that the other shoe could drop at any moment."
The problem is, people tend to ruminate on all the possible bad scenarios, says Marc D. Rabinowitz, a marriage counselor in Norfolk, Virginia. "They're walking around upset that they're going to lose their lifestyle and never get it back." Worse, they fear that their ability to provide for their kids—now and in the future—is in danger. And once you're in this anxious survival mentality, it's tough to find energy left for everyday family life, let alone your marriage.
What makes today's situation even more problematic is that few of us are equipped to deal with the depth and breadth of the downturn. "This generation is used to living in an atmosphere of plenty," says Rosalind S. Dorlen, PsyD, a clinical psychologist in Summit, New Jersey. "When the good life is threatened or taken away from you through no fault of your own, you can feel ripped off." And guess who's the target of all that frustration? The person closest to you.
But tough times don't have to cut so deeply. There are plenty of ways to mend money woes—and along the way make your relationship stronger and closer.
Recession Rift #1: Misdirected Anger
You managed your money carefully. But you can't get a car loan because of the credit crisis, and your boss has reduced your hours. Now your husband and you are lashing out at each other.
Emotional Rescue: Declare a truce on the potshots—which upset the two of you as well as the kids—and remember who you're angry with. "It's the economy, not your partner," says Elizabeth Dickson, a New York City psychotherapist. Vent if you must, but use "I" statements ("I'm so frustrated! We played by the rules, but look where that got us."). And show empathy when you're the listener ("Yes, it's unfair that we've all been hurt."). "If you minimize each other's feelings about the recession, you'll end up fighting about how you're being unsupportive," says Don C. Damsteegt, PhD, a couples therapist in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Instead, remind yourselves what's positive in your lives, including things still under your control. And turn off the news. If one of you tends to shout at Fox or MSNBC, the other should say, "Let's watch a movie."
Recession Rift #2: Regrets About the Past
It was your idea to splurge on a kitchen renovation and his to replace the second car before the first was paid off. Nobody monitored your 401(k)s—and now you're pointing fingers.
Emotional Rescue: The only reason to dredge up mistakes is to learn from them. "Continually berating yourself and your partner creates wounds that aren't easily healed," says Dorlen. It's tough to solve problems unless you both agree to drop the blame game.
Focus on what's best for you as a couple, not your own need to be right. Take responsibility—admitting missteps to yourself and then out loud to your spouse—for choices you made solo and for your role in the financial moves the two of you made together. Lastly, says Dickson, "Remind each other about successes and recognize that you meant the best even with decisions that didn't work out." Then forgive each other. (And if he's not on board with this, let it go anyway!)
Recession Rift #3: Anxiety About the Future
You can't sleep for fear that one of you will be laid off. He's so stressed from putting in extra hours to save his job that he can't eat. You're both sick of each other's complaining.
Emotional Rescue: Put your money worries on the table (in private; the kids don't need to know how upset you are). Stick to why you're feeling stressed (rumored layoffs, shrinking college fund) and save other subjects (the grocery list, carpool schedule) for another time. No matter what, don't accuse each other, which leads to pointless, escalating arguments. Have these conversations regularly—maybe once a week—but the other days, skip the stress talk unless you need to decide something specific. "Obsessively talking about an issue creates anxiety that builds on itself," says Rabinowitz.
Recession Rift #4: Lost Identity
His self-esteem went south when he got laid off and had to take a lower-paying job outside his field. Or you're the one pounding the pavement and wondering what just happened.
Emotional Rescue: When the going gets tough, the smart marriage move is to bring on compassion—probably when you least feel like doing so. Don't grill your husband about whether he sent out resumes. Instead, ask exactly what kind of help he needs, then offer it. If you're the one who lost your job, you should expect your husband to deliver the same tender loving care to you. But also turn to friends. You need to acknowledge your sadness, fears, and frustrations, but don't let yourself wallow in the feelings. Instead, reframe your thinking: The recession and pink slip are nobody's fault, and no matter how much you loved your job, it was what you did, not who you are.
Recession Rift #5: Loss of the Dream
Your vision for the future disappeared along with much of your savings. Forget the cruise for your anniversary or adding on a bedroom.
Emotional Rescue: Talk about what your old goals meant to you, mourn the loss together, then make a pact to live with what is, says Dickson. Set new priorities to match your present circumstances. Instead of going on a big family vacation or building a teen hangout in the basement, says Rabinowitz, consider going away for the weekend to a nearby beach or painting your living room, with pizza and paintbrushes for everybody. It's the sharing of the experiences, not the money spent creating them, that matters most.
Spenders Vs. Savers
Opposite money-management styles can really complicate a marriage. "The differences you may have glossed over before can't be ignored now, because there's less money," says Marcia Brixey, author of The Money Therapist: A Woman's Guide to Creating a Healthy Financial Life (Seal Press). But there are plenty of things you can do to find common ground, says Katherine Yost, PhD, a marriage and family therapist in Bellevue, Washington. With planning, everybody can adapt to the new economy and have his or her emotional needs met at the same time.
For starters, says Yost, let the spender spend. People who are told "No" to everything begin to feel resentful and deprived, and sooner or later (after a fight or on a bad day at work) they'll break out with a spending binge. Everybody gets at least a little discretionary cash—and with it a sense of freedom.
Similarly, allow the saver to save. Putting some money away for a rainy day is fiscally sound, yes. But people who keep a tight rein on spending need to continue doing so to ease their sense of helplessness about what's in the news or what's happening at work. A dollar saved feels like insurance to them.
Most important, though, is to make new couple rules. "When financial guidelines are explicit," says Yost, "the whole family does better."
Have quality-of-life splurges. It could be an occasional dinner out, trading off who chooses when and where. (Give the kids a chance to decide too.)
Create a fun slush fund. Take a certain sum from every paycheck—say $20—and decide what it'll go for, maybe a matinee movie. On off weeks, scope out free local events.
Save money regularly. It doesn't have to be a lot—socking away even just a few dollars a week is a habit that's reassuring when times are tough.
Give each partner a weekly allowance. This amount can be spent without consulting the other. It's for the daily stuff—parking fees, filling up the tank, your morning latte fix, etc.
Plan gift-giving ahead of time. Decide how much you'll be able to spend on family and friends for each of the upcoming holidays and birthdays.
Discuss indulging the kids less. A lot of people want their children to have everything. But it's healthy for them to see you prioritize, and to learn to wait and do with less. Really.
Originally published in the May 2010 issue of Family Circle magazine.


text:
COTD: Big tech and big lobbying
Marc Ross
Based in Washington, DC, I specialize in thought leader communications and global public policy for public affairs professionals working at the intersection of globalization, disruption, and politics.
Clients hire me to ghostwrite, engage influencer networks, manage media relations, produce events, audit their communications infrastructure, consult on hiring, provide issue briefs and news generating talking points, as well as manage end to end communications projects where I assume a role of project leader and general contractor.
I work independently but provided access to a substantial global network of collaborators with expertise in websites, graphic design, audio, video, polling, data analytics, and research.
Using the latest tactics of an American political campaign with expertise shaped by being a practitioner of global business communications, I help clients tell their story and build trusted relationships with all necessary stakeholders.
Successful communications are all about STOCK = strategy, tactics, organization, consistency, and know-how.


text:
Bookshelf of a Heart
301 views 18 comments posted:
There lives a girl, bookshelf in her heart,
And she needs someone to write her life;
Such a life with sharp and sparkling memories,
Some people to remember, some to forget,
But it's not possible to erase their names,
As she noted them down with her heart's ink.
By time, she filled the books one by one.
Pages followed another pages as if there's no end.
Sometimes her tears dropped on them as well,
She took a bit break to find a napkin,
And on some pages she gave a little sigh,
With the shattered pieces deep down in her heart.
She promised herself "no more people to faith in"
Because comers are ruthless, as she knew,
When they leave, taking everything without any give.
However, her pen kept writing, she never gave in
All those years, she's been there for a reason;
It is finding her other half to cure the pain.
Once the girl lost herself among thousand pages,
Those pages built a castle with unbreakable walls,
All around her heart, she let ivy thorns surround;
To keep her safe, the pen was the only shield,
Her feelings were the inky voice of a fragile heart,
From yearning of bliss, long before she's fallen apart.
As the time passing by, on the shelf she found a book,
For her, named: "You're right here within my soul."
She was aware her years were devoted for that!
Yet the book had a silver lock on its side,
She embraced it tight close to her sorrowful heart
With the divine Latin prayers on the tip of her tongue.
The girl was captivated by the book, day and night,
Each time, she's lost pieces when she tried hard
To open the book that she was gifted for a lifetime.
Then she inked her pen and closed her eyes,
By holding hear breath, she pushed it into the lock.
The pen, only shield to her heart now is broke.
Burst in tears, in rage she threw the pen,
Drowning in her own self, no one to understand.
Knot in her throat, she whispered "Why wouldn't you open?"
Then she stood still and made a final decision;
She lit fire to burn the book forever,
Yet, last time her silver tears showered book's cover.
Suddenly the book shone with blinding flames,
Drying the tears on girl's mourning face.
The book came to the sound and replied:
"Silver lock would only be broken with a silver heart!"
And the book held the girl's heart do tight,
Melt down the walls, she set side by side.
There the book opened it gorgeous covers
To let the girl in and see what is inside.
But the holy pages were all preserved blank,
Where she will fill her own blissful stories.
Not of others' and not with the pen this time!
But with the ink coming from the core of her heart!
For the honour of 200th blog..
And for the friend who inspired me to write it a year ago..
I miss you
Share this blog entry
To share this blog post use the code below and insert it into comments, status messages, forum posts or your signature.Blog: Bookshelf of a Heart
Top Comments
Thank you for sharing, HopenDarkness78.57K and congrats on your 200th blog!
All Comments
XpoZ.Torrent38.23K • Show comment
Seems to be this poem is bookshelf of mine heart's too.. Thanks for that..
vahgar11.64K • Show comment
An absolutely scintillating story.
Loved it and hoping for a very happy ending.
Dr.Soc.112.37K • Show comment
Beautifully written. Thank you HopenDarkness78.57K for sharing the poem with us :-)
Tariab60 • Show comment
Once the girl lost herself among thousand pages,
Those pages built a castle with unbreakable walls.
But with the ink coming from the core of her heart!


text:
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
MACQUARIE Research Reports
About Me
- Bluechips 4 U
- yahoo id dineshcnagpal
All opinions are based on my technical study; however, I do not vouch for the accuracy or the completeness of the matter. I am not liable for any potential damages that may be incurred while acting upon any information mentioned in this report. The views expressed are not of binding nature. The report is intended for a restricted audience & I am not soliciting any action based on it. Please exercise discretion and due diligence in making your decisions. Investments in Capital Markets are not my obligation or guarantee and are subject to investment risks. In no event will I be liable for any damages, including without limitation direct or indirect, special, incidental or consequential damages, losses or expenses arising in connection with this report or use thereof or inability to use by any party, or in connection with any failure of performance, error, omission, interruption, defect, delay in operation even if I am thereof, advised of the possibility of such damages, losses or expenses.


text: Space optimisation in cold storage - The Constructor solution for Octapharma Mobile pallet racking & Mesh A new central warehouse has seen the light of day in Stockholm. It is the pharmaceutical company, Octapharma AB, which has built new storage premises. Constructor Sweden has acted as a design partner in the project from start to finish and has then delivered the pallet racking for the entire warehouse. Octapharma is one of the biggest players in the international market for protein-based drugs. The company was founded in 1983 and now has approximately 5,500 employees in 45 countries. Since the capacities of the existing 6,000 m2 warehouse in Langenlonsheim were no longer were able to keep up with the continued strong growth, a mammoth project was decided upon at Corporate Express: over six months of construction in Waldlaubersheim - about 10 km from one of the currently decentralised three logistics centres located in Germany - an ultramodern logistics centre with four buildings and a total area of 45,000 m2 was to be developed. The warehouse is designed to meet the daily flow of goods and includes areas such as; incoming / outgoing goods, warehouse, cold and freeze storage. In the high bay racking, raw materials, consumables and packaging materials will be stored, such as salt, chemicals, hoses and glassware. The cold area is for raw materials and finished products while the freeze warehouse will be used for the storage of raw materials, intermediates and finished products. "Before we took the decision about the material handling equipment, we looked at other storage premises in our group," says Sarah Lundqvist. "However, we did not choose a narrow-aisle solution as the other countries had, but a traditional rack solution with 3 metre wide aisles in the warehouse area. Since we do not have any warehouse function today, it has been difficult for us to choose the right pallet handling system and in this respect Constructor's technical engineers have worked very well as a design partner with us." One of the key rooms of the warehouse is the freezing storage facility. Sarah Lundqvist explains: "Initially, we had planned to install conventional pallet racking in the freezing area, but this solution only gave us 1000 pallet places, which was too little. So we looked for a solution with Constructor suggesting mobile racking (MOVO),we then obtained a total of 1300 pallet places. By installing a MOVO system we could keep the room the same size, but still get in more pallet places, thereby saving energy costs. " Storage of drugs implies great demands on safety, hygiene and temperature while at the same time maintaining safety procedures. For example, the temperature in the freezing area has to be at a constant temperature of -30 degrees centigrade. The room is monitored 24/7 so that it always stays at that temperature. This also applies to the high bay storage (15-25o) and cold room (2-8o) which are also monitored constantly to ensure temperature consistency. With regard to safety, the two outermost sections of the freezing storage area are shielded and interlocked. On the left side finished products are stored which should not be mixed with raw materials, while on the right side the lower pallet places are shielded. Sarah Lundqvist says: "Here we store "quarantine" products. There may be items that we do not know if we can use". Another technical issue in the freezing storage was the escape route, the specification for which is mandatory. The distance from the last mobile rack to the back wall is 1.2 metre. By mounting a rack with tunnel protection above the escape route, this extra space can also be used for storage. Total capacity Number of pallet places: 1387Number of static single racking: 2Number of trolleys: 4Trolley length: 29 900 mm


text:
Separation Anxiety
Wow, over a month since I've posted here. I'm not keeping up very well. I've been managing to post at my book blog about once per week, and I'm contributing to a new book blog at Today's Parent now. But poor Metro Mama blog is getting dusty.
I always come back here when I'm angsty though, and this time is no exception. The good news is that my employer is sending me on a fabulous course in Vancouver: Simon Fraser's two-week Book Publishing Immersion program. The course has an excellent reputation, and work is covering all of my expenses, so it is very, very good news. The bad news is that I'm leaving Sunday, and I'm still in the process of weaning Sherwood. Also, he's still sleeping in our bed. We've been trying to make the move to the crib, but it is not going well (I had about two hours sleep last night). McHotty will be looking after him most of the time I'm gone, but he returns to work for two days, and the grandparents will be taking over. They are not prepared to co-sleep. So the pressure's on. Any tips for me?
I'm actually starting to feel a little sick about leaving him. Unlike his big sister, he is a real mama's boy. Cakes never seemed to have much trouble separating, but he sticks to me like glue. He's not going to be happy; nor am I.


text:
C&D Marketing Group
Name: C&D Marketing Group
Date: October 4, 2018
Time: 7:30 AM - 8:45 AM EDT
Event Description:
C&D Marketing Group is an opportunity for you to grow your business through our weekly meetings. Our breakfast meetings start with each member's mini-mercial (or elevator pitch), has a member or guest presentation, roundtable, testimonials, and passing of referrals. We have found our roundtable time is highly effective for local business owners - if you have an issue, chances are most other businesses have that same issue. Discussions with other members provide their solutions and options. Because C&D Marketing limits our members to one of each business type, members get to truly know about each other's business so that referrals come naturally for our members. Networking is an important part of growing and maintaining your business. C&D Marketing is a perfect forum for such networking.


text:
Precise viscosity measurement with the Lovis 2000 M microviscometer is an efficient and smart way to determine a polymer's quality, which strongly depends on its molar mass and molecular chain length. Both influence the viscosity of a dilute polymer solution, which is also the subject of ASTM and ISO standards for various specific polymers.
When dissolving polymers in a solvent, the solution's viscosity is higher than that of the pure solvent. By this thickening effect a polymer's molar mass can be specified. The higher the molar mass, the more viscous the solution. For most polymers there is a definite relationship between average molar mass and the relative increase of viscosity in dilute solution.
There are several ASTM and ISO standards that describe dilute solution viscosity procedures for specific polymers.