text:
Portals in Libraries: Assessment and Outcomes
Amos A. Lakos is librarian, Rosenfeld Management Library, Anderson School of Management, UCLA. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.com.
This paper highlights the importance of assessment in a portal framework and examines some of the outcomes and impacts of some existing portals.
Portals provide both a challenge and an opportunity for ongoing assessment. To ensure that a portal is successful we need to think about creating an assessment framework that will track system activities and the portal's impact on customers, stakeholders and staff.
The following are the key principles that should govern any portal rollout:
Continuous assessment is needed in order to be well informed about customer expectations, to ensure that expected outcomes are delivered and to maintain a high degree of portal effectiveness.
An important part of assessment is continuous usability assessment with the goal of ensuring that the portal achieves and adheres to the principles mentioned. Timely adjustments based on usability information also ensure long-term customer retention. In general, usability needs to be understood as a strategic imperative, as a way to keep portal customers focused, and as a wise future and customer focused investment. Systematic usability studies and a continuous feedback loop should ensure that outcomes and impacts are achieved.
We need to understand the outcomes and impacts of a portal from an implementation as well as from a maintenance perspective. In an academic setting, the organization needs to identify the desired learning and research outcomes the need for organizing information resources into coherent channels in order to be better able to manage the information glut to the end-user. Another important and measurable outcome is time or rather efficiencies that save time. Allowing self-sufficiency by empowering users to personalize their portal to individual needs is a well-documented expectation. Administrative and financial efficiencies are also expected outcomes, both from an institutional and customer perspective. "One stop" solutions for activities and services that currently are delivered by different departments and processes is an organic result of a well planned portal. A timely and well-functioning feedback loop will also allow the institution to be better informed and the clients to be better served.
In the academic environment, student retention and retention of alumni loyalty are important strategic goals. In the public library environment, the ability to retain the community's support by demonstrating the value of the institution's services is of strategic importance in retaining financial and community support. Business portals are becoming essential for making enterprises more flexible and enabling e-business to succeed.
The following are some of the potential impacts of portals in higher education:
Examples of University Based Portals
University of Minnesota One Stop - http://onestop.umn.edu/ (Figure 1)
Over 25,000 students use the portal at the University of Minnesota. Training in the use of the portal is delivered through the portal itself, increasing the students' buy-in, which is especially important since one of the portal's goals is to foster a lifelong relationship with the university. The portal stays with the student after graduation. Advisors use a course management system to monitor the fluctuating levels of students' work and to advise and help in a timely fashion, which increases student learning and retention. University public services staff is cross-trained to answer questions on the "one stop" principle. Students can get all their service issues resolved in one place. The online admissions process saves over $300,000 a year, and the need for annual audit is decreasing.
University of Buffalo MyUB - http://www.buffalo.edu/aboutmyub/ (Figure 2)
This Web portal has been in development for a number of years as an integrated enterprise portal. Current awareness is highly impacted by a new "need to know" feature, which sends critical campus news feeds to each portal user. The course management system allows faculty and advisors to view students' academic activities and to advise them proactively. One of the outcomes is that faculty are better informed about student performance. Students use a course balance calculator, which allows them to be better informed about how they stand academically. Grades are available on line. Faculty has easy and accurate access to class lists, which was a major concern. Addresses can be changed on line and kept current. Paper use is down across the campus. Because of a better integrated Web-based campus financial system, the error rate in financial transactions and failed payments is decreasing, generating real savings.
University of Washington MyUW - http://myuw.washington.edu/servlet/myuw.mainpage.Mainpage?f=d&tab=frp (Figure 3)
This campus-wide decentralized portal works differently from other, more centralized portal frameworks. Portal services are based on roles and not single IDs. This role-based access means that each user can have a number of different portals or different views. All registrations and admissions are on line, and all information and documentation is available to registered students. Individual faculty controls the course management system, which includes scheduling classes and exams. The UW Medical Network is building a new portal framework that currently allows over 100 diabetes patients to track their condition in real time through the portal. They can access all their personal medical information electronically. The goal is to develop a patient-relationship portal for the whole university hospital. MyUW is currently developing an open source calendaring system.
University of California-San Diego Blink - http://blink.ucsd.edu/ (Figure 4).
Blink is a campus administrative portal that primarily covers admissions, human resources, purchasing, payroll and other administrative functions on campus. There are plans to extend it to the academic areas soon. It allows for easy feedback from members and records a high satisfaction rate. In admissions, for example, the number of phoned questions has decreased dramatically. In other areas, such as human resources, payroll and purchasing, the number of simple questions is down dramatically as well. Because of these and other impacts, work processes and staff responsibilities are changing. Staff training needs to change constantly. One possibly important outcome for UCSD is that they have not had to increase staff while the academic side has been expanding.
The number of academic and library portal projects is growing. Portal implementation issues continue to rank high on campus IT surveys. However, portals are still currently viewed as an expense and not as an investment. Analysis and awareness of their impacts and outcomes on an enterprise will change this perception, as the measurable value of the impact of enterprise portals is better understood. Together with their parent organizations, libraries have to continue measuring and demonstrating the impacts of Web portal services to their customers and stakeholders.
Copyright © 2004, American Society for Information Science and Technology


text:
At the commencement of and during the course of an action, all remedies providing for seizure of property for the purpose of securing satisfaction of the judgment ultimately to be entered in the action are available under the circumstances and in the manner provided by the law of this state existing at the time the remedy is sought.
At the commencement of and throughout an action, every remedy is available that, under the law of this state, provides for seizing property to secure satisfaction of the potential judgment.
Rule 64 was amended, effective ________________.
Rule 64 is derived from Rule 64, FRCivP Fed.R.Civ.P. 64.
The principal departure from the federal rule is the authorization for the use of the remedies only for the seizure of property, not persons as in Rule 64, FRCivP Fed.R.Civ.P. 64. Qualifications to the federal rule do not apply to the North Dakota court system and were not included. Also, the listing of remedies available has been omitted. These are found in the North Dakota Century Code.
The remedies available in this state include attachment (N.D.C.C. Chapter 32-08.1, N.D.C.C.), replevin (N.D.C.C. Chapter 32-07, N.D.C.C.), garnishment (N.D.C.C. Chapter 32-09, N.D.C.C.), and others. In recent years, many state laws authorizing prejudgment remedies but not providing for prior notice and hearing have been struck down. See, Sniadach v. Family Finance Corporation of Bay View, 89 S.Ct. 1820, 395 U.S. 337, 23 L.Ed.2d 349 (1969); Fuentes v. Shevin, 92 S.Ct. 1983, 407 U.S. 67, 32 L.Ed.2d 556 (1972); Mitchell v. W. T. Grant Co., 416 U.S. 600, 94 S.Ct. 1895, 40 L.Ed.2d 406 (1974); Shaffer v. Heitner, 433 U.S. 186, 97 S.Ct. 2569, 53 L.Ed.2d 683 (1977); and Guzeman v. Western State Bank, 516 F.2d 125 (8th Cir. 1974). The latter case ruled that the North Dakota attachment statute (N.D.C.C. Chapter 32-08, N.D.C.C.) violated due process. That statute was subsequently repealed and replaced by N.D.C.C. Chapter 32-08.1, N.D.C.C.
It is also possible some federal laws may take precedence in this area. For example, Sections 203 and 204 of the Soldiers' and Sailors' Civil Relief Act of 1940, 50 U.S.C. Appendix, 523 and 524, provide under certain circumstances for the vacation or stay of any attachment or garnishment directed against the serviceman's property, money, or debts in the hands of another.
Rule 64 was amended, effective _______________, in response to the December 1, 2007, revision of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The language and organization of the rule were changed to make the rule more easily understood and to make style and terminology consistent throughout the rules.
Sources: Joint Procedure Committee Minutes of ________________ November 29-30, 1979, pages 20-21;Rule Fed.R.Civ.P. 64, FRCivP.
Cross Reference: Rule N.D.R.Civ.P. 4 (Persons Subject to Jurisdiction-Process-Service), N.D.R.Civ.P.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Cattle egret
(Bubulcus ibis)
Facts about this animal
With a total length of 48-53 cm and a wing span of 90-96 cm, the cattle egret is one the smaller members of the heron family, and is the smallest of the four white egret species in Southern Africa from which it can easily be distinguished by its shorter neck.
Sexual dimorphism is minor: males are slightly larger than females and have the feathers of chest and centre of mantle cream buff during the non-breeding period while females are white. During breeding, the plumage looks alike in both sexes, being partly ginger-buff and partly white. The bill and iris are yellow for most of the year turning red for a short period before egg-laying. The legs are yellowish-green and the feet dark green for most of the year. During the reproduction period the feet will become red and then yellow.
The cattle egret has got its name because it has the habit of feeding in association with slow-moving herds of cattle or other large herbivores.
Did you know?
that the cattle egret has undergone an enormous expansion in range in the last century, initially through Africa, Southwest Europe, South and East Asia, but has now colonized all continents except the Antarctica? It thus has a fair claim to a place among the few cosmopolitan bird species, even if it has scarcely yet ventured into much of northern and eastern Eurasia or far-northern America.
|Name (Scientific)
|Bubulcus ibis
|Name (English)
|Cattle egret
|Name (French)
|Héron garde-boeuf
|Name (German)
|Name (Spanish)
|Garcilla bueyera
|Local names
|Afrikaans: Bosluisvoël
Czech: Volavka rusohlavá
Italian: Airone guardabuoi
Greek: Geladáris
Hungarian: Pásztoegém
Portuguese: Garça-boieira, Garça-vaqueira
Romansh: Irun bultg
|CITES Status
|Appendix III (Danemark)
|CMS Status
|Not listed in CMS Included in AEWA
Photo Copyright by
Su Neko
|Native to parts of Africa, Asia and Europa, but has spread in recent years to North- and South America, and Australia.
|Found in many habitat types (fields, marshes, freshwater wetlands, pastures, livestock pens, swamps), often near farmland and cattle. It is less dependent on aquatic habitats than other egrets.
|Wild population
|Common and widespread (Red List IUCN 2011).
|Zoo population
|1045 reported to ISIS (2007)
In the Zoo
How this animal should be transported
For air transport, Container Note 17 of the IATA Live Animals Regulations should be followed.
Find this animal on ZooLex
Photo Copyright by
Su Neko
Why do zoos keep this animal
Within their natural range, there is not really a need for keeping cattle egrets in aviaries or under flight restraing conditions because the species will readily chose the safe haven of zoological gardens as their habitat and often will establish large breeding colonies.
Outside the species' range, cattle egrets are kept primarily for educational purposes, ideally in mixed exhibits with larger mammals, from capybara to elephants.


text:
Ire over soldier's death undermines Taiwan army
TAIPEI, Taiwan (AP) — Taiwanese President Ma Ying-jeou apologized Wednesday for the death of a 24-year-old soldier while under confinement in a military brig, and ordered military officials to investigate the tragedy.
The July 3 death of the university graduate set off a wave of anger in the country, undermining Ma's already low popularity and raising hard questions about the future of the island's military.
Hung Chung-chiu died after being forced to perform a vigorous regime of sit-ups, push-ups, jumping jacks and squats in sweltering heat at a base in suburban Taipei. He was only three days away from completing his mandatory 20-month service requirement. His punishment was ordered because he brought a banned cell phone onto his base.
"I want to express my sincere apologies to the family," Ma said, bowing deeply at his Nationalist Party headquarters to express remorse over an incident that has affected Taiwan's 23 million people with a force not seen since the jailing of former President Chen Shui-bian on corruption charges nearly five years ago. "But apologizing and leaving it at that just isn't enough."
Ma went on to delineate a series of detailed instructions he has given to high ranking Defense Ministry personnel, aimed at finding out precisely how Hung died.
Ma's gesture aside, the real significance of the Hung case lies in the damage it may do to Taiwan's military, now in the midst of an ambitious transition from a mixed force of conscripts and volunteers to an all-volunteer army.
Even before Hung's death it was struggling to attract enough recruits to meet the 2015 all-volunteer target amid widespread perceptions that decreasing tensions with China had destroyed the rationale for military service that once existed.
Now its recruiting job has become infinitely harder.
China and Taiwan split amid civil war in 1949, and China continues to see the island as part of its territory, to be brought back into the fold by persuasion if possible, by force if necessary.
Over the weekend thousands of demonstrators gathered in downtown Taipei to demand answers from military officials about the circumstances of Hung's death, including an explanation of why 16 CCTV cameras set up in the detention barracks where he was forced to perform his calisthenics regime all went blank for 80 minutes during a critical period two days before he died. No comprehensive explanation has yet been offered for the blackout.
The Defense Ministry has already punished 37 officers in connection with the incident, including at least 15 who face criminal prosecution. Ma himself visited the bereaved family last week, pledging his office's cooperation in getting to the truth.
The military was already facing distrust among many Taiwanese, much of it stemming from the central role it played in perpetuating a martial law regime that was dismantled in 1987.
The anger over Hung's death also seems to underscore a developing unhappiness over Ma's leadership. Re-elected to a second four-year in January 2012, the president's popularity has been on a downward trajectory ever since.
He has been routinely castigated for neglecting the Taiwanese economy amid a helter-skelter pursuit of closer ties with China and for a remote leadership style that seems more appropriate to imperial China than democratic Taiwan. The result has been personal approval ratings in the mid-teens to low 20s, amid mounting disquiet in Ma's own Nationalist Party ranks, where many now fear the party may lose the 2016 presidential elections.
"People are angry at Ma's administration," said Apple Daily newspaper columnist Antonio Chiang, a longtime Ma critic. "They're angry with his insensitivity and indecisiveness. There's a lot of long term frustration."
That frustration is plainly evident on the Website established in honor of Hung, which features dozens of angry blogs bemoaning the perceived shortcomings of the Ma administration.
In any case, Ma doesn't have much time. Term limits will remove him from the presidential office in less than three years.


text:
The Beam in Your Eye
If steroids are cheating, why isn't LASIK?
And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
A month ago, Mark McGwire was hauled before a congressional hearing and lambasted as a cheater for using a legal, performance-enhancing steroid precursor when he broke baseball's single-season home run record.
A week ago, Tiger Woods was celebrated for winning golf's biggest tournament, the Masters, with the help of superior vision he acquired through laser surgery.
What's the difference?
At the steroid hearing on March 17, numerous members of the House Committee on Government Reform, led by Chairman Tom Davis, R-Va., denounced performance-enhancing drugs. They offered three arguments: The drugs are illegal, they're harmful, and they're cheating. But illegality doesn't explain why a drug should be illegal, and the steroid precursor McGwire took, andro, was legal at the time. The director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse conceded at the hearing that steroid precursors weren't banned until last year, that steroids "do, in fact, enhance certain types of physical performance," that some are "prescribed to treat body wasting in patients with AIDS and other diseases that result in loss of lean muscle mass," and that "not all anabolic steroid abusers experience the same deleterious outcomes."
Don't get me wrong. If you buy a steroid off the street or the Internet today just to bulk up, you're taking a stupid risk. But much of that risk comes from your ignorance and the dubious grade of steroid you're getting. A star player with access to the best stuff and the best medical supervision isn't taking the same degree of risk. Furthermore, steroids are a crude, early phase of enhancement technology. Chemists are trying every day to refine compounds and doses that might help pro athletes without bad side effects.
Already the medical objection to doping has holes. At the hearing, lawmakers displayed a supposedly damning list of "Performance Enhancing Substances Not Covered by Baseball's New Testing Program." The first item on the list was human growth hormone. But the Food and Drug Administration has approved human growth hormone for use in short, healthy children based on studies showing its safety and efficacy. The National Institutes of Health says it's "generally considered to be safe, with rare side effects" in children, and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists has found the same pattern in adults.
That leaves one comprehensive complaint: cheating. At the hearing, I heard six lawmakers apply this term to performance-enhancing drugs. They compared the drugs to corking bats, deadening baseballs, and sharpening spikes. "When I played with Hank Aaron and Willie Mays and Ted Williams, they didn't put on 40 pounds of bulk in their careers, and they didn't hit more homers in their late thirties than they did in their late twenties," said Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky. "What's happening now in baseball isn't natural, and it isn't right." Rep. Mark Souder, R-Ind., chairman of the House subcommittee on drug policy, recalled that baseball had harshly punished players who threw games. He asked why such punishment didn't apply to "players today who systematically cheat through steroids and performance-enhancing drugs to alter the games." Davis, who presided at the hearing, announced that he would co-chair "Zero Tolerance: The Advisory Committee on Ending the Use of Performance-Enhancing Drugs in Sports."
Zero tolerance? Wait a minute. If the andro that helped McGwire hit 70 home runs in 1998 was an unnatural, game-altering enhancement, what about his high-powered contact lenses? "Natural" vision is 20/20. McGwire's custom-designed lenses improved his vision to 20/10, which means he could see at a distance of 20 feet what a person with normal, healthy vision could see at 10 feet. Think what a difference that makes in hitting a fastball. Imagine how many games those lenses altered.
You could confiscate McGwire's lenses, but good luck confiscating Woods' lenses. They've been burned into his head. In the late 1990s, both guys wanted stronger muscles and better eyesight. Woods chose weight training and laser surgery on his eyes. McGwire decided eye surgery was too risky and went for andro instead. McGwire ended up with 70 homers and a rebuke from Congress for promoting risky behavior. Woods, who had lost 16 straight tournaments before his surgery, ended up with 20/15 vision and won seven of his next 10 events.
Since then, scores of pro athletes have had laser eye surgery, known as LASIK (Laser-Assisted In Situ Keratomileusis). Many, like Woods, have upgraded their vision to 20/15 or better. Golfers Scott Hoch, Hale Irwin, Tom Kite, and Mike Weir have hit the 20/15 mark. So have baseball players Jeff Bagwell, Jeff Cirillo, Jeff Conine, Jose Cruz Jr., Wally Joyner, Greg Maddux, Mark Redman, and Larry Walker. Amare Stoudemire and Rip Hamilton of the NBA have done it, along with NFL players Troy Aikman, Ray Buchanan, Tiki Barber, Wayne Chrebet, and Danny Kanell. These are just some of the athletes who have disclosed their results in the last five years. Nobody knows how many others have gotten the same result.
Does the upgrade help? Looks that way. Maddux, a pitcher for the Atlanta Braves, was 0-3 in six starts before his surgery. He won nine of his next 10 games. Kite had LASIK in 1998 and won six events on the Champions Tour over the next five years. Three months after his surgery, Irwin captured the Senior PGA Tour Nationwide Championship.
According to Golf Digest, Woods aimed for 20/15 when he signed up for LASIK. This probably didn't strike Woods as enhancement, since he was already using contacts that put him at 20/15. Now ads and quotes offering 20/15 are everywhere. One LASIK practice takes credit for giving Irwin 20/15 vision. Another boasts of raising Barber to 20/15 and calls the result "better than perfect." Other sellers promise the same thing and offer evidence to back it up. Last year, they report, 69 percent of traditional LASIK patients in a study had 20/16 vision six months after their surgery, and new "wavefront" technology raised the percentage to 85. Odds are, if you're getting LASIK, you're getting enhanced.
The medical spin for LASIK, as opposed to the entrepreneurial spin, is that it's corrective. Your eyesight sucks, you go in for surgery, you hope for 20/20. Maybe you get it, maybe you don't, and that's that. But it isn't that simple. If you don't like the results, your doctor might fire up the laser for a second pass. In the business, this is literally called an "enhancement." Hoch, the golfer, got four enhancements in 2002 and 2003. He ended up 20/15 in one eye, 20/10 in the other.
Nor do you need poor vision to find a willing doctor. Most states think you're fine to drive a car without corrective lenses as long as your eyesight is better than 20/40. Cirillo, then a third baseman for the Seattle Mariners, was 20/35 in one eye and 20/30 in the other when he went in for LASIK two years ago. He came out 20/20 and 20/12. Cruz, an outfielder for the Toronto Blue Jays, was 20/30 when he went for an eye exam. Five days later, he was under the beam. "The doctor kind of talked me into it," Cruz told the Toronto Star. He came out 20/15. According to the Orange County Register, Gary Sheffield, then an outfielder for the Los Angeles Dodgers, had eyesight better than 20/20 when he asked for laser surgery to raise his batting average. His doctor talked him out of it.
Why risk surgery for such small increments? "Every little half-centimeter counts," Cruz told the Star. Last year, the Seattle Times reported that Troy Glaus, a power hitter for the Anaheim Angels, had gotten LASIK because he "felt his contacts were sufficient, just not always ideal. A windy day or a wave of dust could tip the advantage back to the pitcher." Often, coaches play a role. The Minnesota Twins training staff successfully encouraged several players to get LASIK. Maddux told the Atlanta Journal and Constitution that the Braves gave him "a little push" to get LASIK in 2000. Meanwhile, the Braves' manager, having talked to the same doctor about getting LASIK, in his own words "chickened out."
This is the difference between therapy and enhancement. You don't need bad vision to get the surgery. Wavefront, if you've got the bucks for it, reliably gives you 20/16 or better. If your vision ends up corrected but not enhanced, you can go back for a second pass. Players calculate every increment. Pro golfers seek "to optimize any competitive advantage," a LASIK surgeon told the Los Angeles Times. "They're already tuned in to the best clubs, the best putter, the best ball. ... Clearly having great vision is one of the best competitive advantages you can have." Eyes are just another piece of equipment. If you don't like 'em, change 'em.
The sports establishment is obtuse to this revolution. Leagues worry about how you might doctor bats, balls, or clubs. They don't focus on how you might doctor yourself. Look at the official rules of Major League Baseball: A pitcher can't put rosin on his glove, but he can put it on his hand. A batter can't alter the bat "to improve the distance factor," but the rules don't bar him from altering his body to get the same result. Baseball now has a dope-testing policy, but it isn't in the rules; the players negotiate it. That's why it's weak.
At last month's hearing, baseball commissioner Bud Selig testified that in 1998 and 1999 he sent his executive vice president to Costa Rica to check out reports that juiced-up baseballs were causing an epidemic of home runs. Selig was looking for the wrong kind of juice. The U.S. Golf Association's Rules of Golf share the same blind spot: You can't use a device to warm the ball, but you can use it to warm your hands. You can't use a device to measure distance or "gauge the slope of the green," but you can get the same powers through LASIK. In the age of biotechnology, you are the device.
Read the testimonials. At 20/15, Kanell can read the eyes of defensive backs. Tom Lehman, who will lead the U.S. golf team in next year's Ryder Cup, says Lasik improved his ability to "judge distances"—a common benefit, according to the technology's purveyors. Woods says he's "able to see slopes in greens a lot clearer." Woods' eye surgeon told the Los Angeles Times, "Golfers get a different three-dimensional view of the green after LASIK." They "can see the grain" and "small indentations. It's different. Lasik actually produces, instead of a spherical cornea, an aspherical cornea. It may be better than normal vision."
Just ask Tom Davis. "I was in and out in less than one hour," the congressman reports in a testimonial for the Eye Center, a Northern Virginia LASIK practice. "I was reading and watching television that evening. My reading was not impaired and my distance vision was excellent."
Good for you, Tom. Now, about that committee you've established for zero tolerance of performance enhancement. Are you sure you're the right guy to chair it?


text:
or make 4 interest-free payments of $32.50 AUD fortnightly with More info
Margot - dress to impress with this beautiful ensemble of faceted gold, sparkling forest green rhinestones, fresh Citrine gemstones and gold trimmed black agate.
ear post : .925 sterling silver
metal : 8K gold, brass
feature : citrine, rhinestones, black agate
weight per pair 21.5g
stud 7mm
width 18mm
length 90mm
We want you to enjoy your piece ASAP and will dispatch your order within 1-2 business days of payment. Depending on your location, domestic orders are usually delivered within 4-5 business days.
Need to speed up the process?
Upgrade your shipping to signature + express for an extra $3.
All orders are sent registered with signature on delivery via Australia Post.
We'll even send you a confirmation email with its tracking number so you don't have to wait by the door for Mr postman!
Shipping rates are automatically calculated by weight at time of checkout.
Orders exceeding 500g will incur a higher shipping rate.
worldwide shipping
We ship to all countries accepted by Australia Post. If your country rates aren't listed, don't worry as your shipping rate will be automatically calculated at time of checkout.
Every detail counts! We ensure every piece is individually inspected before securing each order within our signature gift-wrapping & keepsake box.
free shipping over $200
If you're in Australia, enjoy FREE standard shipping for orders over $200 – yay!
Want to secure your parcel? Add signature on delivery for an extra $3
To make life easier, please ensure you provide the correct shipping information, as once purchases have been dispatched, they are unable to be altered, cancelled or redirected.
We are here to help wherever we can, so if you have a question regarding your order, please contact firstname.lastname@example.com
Our products are handmade and may have slight variances, tool marks, uneven surfaces, colour variances and minor flaws. Due to differences in your computer monitor, colours and finishes may vary slightly from the actual product shown. Please take this into consideration when purchasing from us.
There's a lot of love when making our jewellery, and just as much should be used when taking take of it! If dropped, items may become chipped, loose, or break, so please treat them with care as we are unable to refund items that are damaged due to negligence.
Like anything, the more you look after it, the longer it will last; so to extend the life of your item, please take the following precautions:
+ avoid moisturisers, chlorine, hairspray, perfumes and direct contact with water, as some metals may react to these products and may cause discolouration or tarnishing of the product.
+ keep your jewellery stored in our gift packaging away from extreme heat, moisture & harsh lighting and ensure each piece is separated from the other to avoid tangling, rubbing or scratching from other jewels.
+ our items consist of gemstones, crystals and glass, and should be treated with the utmost care. Chips, breaks or damage to these will not be treated as a fault and will not be valid for a refund or exchange.
exchanges – change of mind
We want you to be happy with your purchase so will gladly credit or exchange your piece to equal or lesser product value. Items must not be worn, used, or damaged and safely returned in its original gift packaging. Customer is responsible for any return shipping costs.
Unfortunately, we cannot exchange earrings (due to hygiene reasons), sale, or up-cycled jewellery.
In the unlikely event a product is faulty, we will gladly exchange, repair or refund the item. You must contact email@example.com within 48hours of receiving the item notifying us of the fault, along with your invoice number, proof of purchase and photos of the damage.
Items must be returned in its original packaging, and sent with a tracking number ensuring it arrives within 10 days of order being submitted.
We take no responsibility for lost or damaged returns.
We will assess the faulty item and will gladly refund, exchange or repair the item if the item appears to be the fault of craftsmanship. If the item is found to be a fault of the customer, all associated costs will be the responsibility of said person.
If you have damaged your piece and would like us to repair it, please contact us at firstname.lastname@example.com informing us of the damage and attaching pictures for reference. Buyer is responsible for return shipping costs and associated repair costs.
Have more questions? Click here to read our full Policies & Procedures
gemstones & crystals
Our natural gemstones and crystals are all beautifully unique and will vary in size, shape and colour. Because of this, please note that your piece may not be the one as displayed in the photo, but still beautiful all the same.
up-cycled jewellery
The go-to jewellery collection for when you want something truly unique! Our up-cycled jewellery is a unique pairing of modern day materials with vintage and/or recycled components, making each and every piece in this collection one-of-a-kind. That's right – there is only ONE of each design, meaning you and only YOU will get to enjoy it!
**Due to the nature of these rare, recycled objects, we cannot specify the materials of the individual recycled objects.


text:
Making a Case for Capital Spending
Splicing the genes of an accountant and an engineer might help cost-justify plant improvement projects, but a dash of showmanship and passion also help build capex consensus.
Money begets money, and those who control the purse have no shortage of options on where to park their funds. Unfortunately, manufacturing in general and food and beverage production in particular usually are not in the top tier of options.
Capital improvements have to compete with marketing programs, acquisition war chests and investor disbursements for funding. If projects are to make the transition from drawing board to reality, engineers and production managers must be conversant in the lingua franca of accountants. If the efficiency gains and payback calculations overlook or omit any key factors, a project might fall short of the internal rate of return and never be funded.
But capital projects aren't just about money; they also involve human interaction. The difference between projects that get done and those that languish is not simply a matter of which generate the fastest ROI. It also has to do with the people who are pitching them and the groundwork they lay.
Data collection and reporting systems are a funding challenge today, and they were an even tougher boardroom sell 12 years ago. As the 20th Century was drawing to a close, industry threw billions of dollars into IT upgrades to avoid a feared Year 2000 computer meltdown. Y2K turned out to be a non-event, and senior management was left with a sour taste, questioning what had been gained by diverting capital from other projects.
It was not the best time to request $35 million to implement a manufacturing execution system (MES) across a platform of 48 plants and 500 lines. Walt Staehle, then a director of manufacturing execution & shop floor information systems, drew the assignment at Kraft Foods.
Standardized data on overall equipment effectiveness (OEE) and other key performance indicators was viewed with suspicion and apprehension at the time. Some processing professionals thought the data would determine which plants closed and which would be modernized. Preliminary work on the MES project was paid from operating budgets, but the board of directors would make the final go/no-go call.
Before approaching the Kraft board, Staehle began lining up support among the vice presidents of various corporate divisions. These individuals needed an answer to WIIFM: what's in it for me? Unless he could convince them that MES would deliver real value to their operational areas, those managers would either be indifferent or consider MES a direct threat to funding for their own pet projects.
By the time he made his funding pitch, Staehle had six vice presidents solidly in his camp. Simply discussing ROI numbers and discussing other fundamentals would not be enough.
"The folks in that boardroom are looking to see if you're confident and have the stomach and the passion to drive the project," explains Staehle, who recently was named senior director of national and strategic accounts for Siemens Industry Inc., Spring House, Pa. "They want to know, 'Does this create a vision for us, does it support our vision, is this a paradigm shift?' And they want to know if they have a leader that they can entrust with this investment. That goes beyond ROI."
Even with middle management support, Staehle faced lobbying by in-house competitors and senior vice presidents with their own agendas. He laid out the financial aspects, described how risk would be managed, explained the quality-assurance benefits, then addressed the emotional element.
"I closed with a description of Alexander the Great's campaign into Asia Minor," Staehle recalls. "After his army crossed the Hellespont, Alexander ordered that the 120 ships that transported his soldiers across the straight be burned in the harbor. After pointing out we were a year and a half into the project, I said, 'Now is the time to burn the ships.'
"The room went absolutely quiet for what seemed like an hour but was probably just seconds. Then the board agreed to fund it."
Hard assets, hard sell
Before America's financial industry imploded in 2008, manufacturing was the red-headed stepchild of investment. Why put a dollar into producing goods on the chance of receiving two dollars in five years? After all, derivatives and exotic financial instruments could yield triple returns overnight. Those opportunities no longer exist, of course, and although food companies by and large are awash in cash these days, generally they are directing it toward acquisitions, bigger dividends and stock buy-backs.
Whatever's left goes into the capital bucket, where individual projects compete with other possible initiatives in the facility and, in the case of multi-plant companies, throughout the network. Executive management of privately held companies are more tolerant of longer paybacks than those at large public firms, observes Paul Hudale, sales director at Nutec Group, a York, Pa.-based architectural engineering firm. And the gap is widening.
"Small guys tell you point blank, 'We can take a seven-year payback, we're in it for the long haul,' " he says. Conversely, a disposable-building philosophy is evolving at publicly traded corporations. Cognizant of the changes automation has brought in the past 20 years, they are capitalizing greenfield projects that will reach obsolescence at the end of the depreciation schedule.
Greenfields will always account for a portion of capital spending, of course, if only because the fastest growing food companies — think Greek yogurt-maker Chobani and Living Essentials, maker of 5-Hour Energy — typically manufacture products that didn't exist 10 years earlier. Nonetheless, new construction is a waning investment category.
Join the discussion
We welcome your thoughtful comments.
All comments will display your user name.
Want to participate in the discussion?Register for free
Log in for complete access.
No one has commented on this page yet.
RSS feed for comments on this page | RSS feed for all comments


text:
Anthem Senior Research Scientist (Safety & Epidemiology)-PS5972 in Chattanooga, Tennessee
Senior Research Scientist (Safety & Epidemiology)-PS5972
Location: United States
Field: Reporting & Data Analysis
Requisition #: PS5972
Post Date: Jun 22, 2018
Senior Research Scientist, Safety and Epidemiology
HealthCore, Inc., a health services research firm, is seeking a Senior Research Scientist, Safety and Epidemiology with experience in pharmacoepidemiology research to join our dynamic company. Founded in 1996, and now an independently-operating subsidiary of Anthem, Inc., HealthCore provides the health care system, biopharmaceutical industry, academia, and the Federal Government with "real-world" data to improve the quality, safety, and affordability of healthcare. HealthCore's projects range from retrospective to large-scale, prospective studies in the areas of drug, vaccine, and medical device safety surveillance, risk management, pharmacoepidemiology, health outcomes, pharmacoeconomics, and comparative effectiveness research.
We are currently seeking a highly experienced Senior Research Scientist to join our Safety and Epidemiology team. The Senior Research Scientist will provide scientific leadership and expertise to the execution of real world evidence pharmacoepidemiology, risk management, and medical product safety studies.
Person may be located either in Wilmington, DE, Watertown, MA, Atlanta, GA or may be remote.
Responsibilities include:
The Senior Research Scientist is responsible for leading Safety and Epidemiology studies, including development and execution of research design and methodology, cultivating and managing scientific client relationships, strategic planning/new business development, and mentorship of team members.
Primary duties may include, but are not limited to:
• Scientific leadership
o Provide scientific leadership for a portfolio of Safety and Epidemiology research projects.
o Serve as Principal Investigator (PI) and subject matter expert in:
Epidemiology research design and statistical methodology;
Targeted therapeutic areas and clinical practice within the United States health system; and
Synthesis, interpretation, and dissemination of key study findings to multiple stakeholders.
o Lead and support the development of timely, accurate, and high quality client proposals, protocols, statistical analysis plans, reports, presentations, and publications.
o Provide scientific mentorship to members of the research team including:
Dedicated support to the growth and development of research associates' scientific skills and expertise within HealthCore's research environment; and
Motivate research associates to accomplish corporate goals and support the growth and success of HealthCore's Safety and Epidemiology business unit.
o Conduct and support independent research, publish research findings, present at professional scientific meetings, and engage with various external professional societies/organizations/boards.
• Business development
o Represent HealthCore as subject matter expert in research and data capabilities and support the development of new research opportunities and client relationships.
o Lead the content development of study proposals in response to a Request for Proposal, including research design and methods with input into scope, budget, and timeline.
o Support business development in key account strategies to achieve overall sales targets for the Safety and Epidemiology business unit.
o Lead and support the scientific, methodologic, and clinical development and direction of the research team, including new product and services development and support.
Requires a Ph.D in health service research, biostatistics, epidemiology, health policy, economics or related field, or a clinical degree such as an MD or PharmD with residency or fellowship research training, 10+ years of increasing responsibility as a subject matter expert to research teams in health outcomes projects conducting research using health plan administrative databases (pharmacy and medical claims), with excellence demonstrated by extensive publication of articles and presentation or research at national and international conferences, and serving as a technical subject expert on health services research panels, or any combination of education and experience, which would provide an equivalent background. Managed care, PBM, pharmaceutical, or related experience preferred.
Additionally need 5+ years of experience in epidemiologic research; 3+ years of experience demonstrating progressing responsibilities leading project teams in the execution of research studies, including 2+ years of experience managing client interactions; or any combination of education and experience which would provide an equivalent background.
• PhD in Epidemiology preferred.
• Excellent oral, written, and presentation skills.
• Ability to thrive in a constantly changing environment.
• Strong research background that includes study design and analytical skills.
• Relevant experience in conducting research using health plan administrative databases (pharmacy and medical claims) preferred.
• Consulting, clinical, payer, biopharmaceutical, or related experience preferred.
Working at HealthCore
In addition to a dynamic work environment, HealthCore offers a competitive salary and an outstanding benefits program including a 401(k) plan; health, dental, and vision insurance; discounted fitness club membership; life, AD&D, short and long-term disability insurance coverage; tuition assistance, and an employee stock purchase plan and free parking. As an independently operating subsidiary of Anthem, HealthCore offers the resources of the nation's leading health benefits company in a small company environment.
HealthCore is headquartered in Wilmington, DE, midway between New York City and Washington, DC, with offices in Watertown, MA, Andover, MA, Alexandria, VA, and Atlanta, GA.
An Equal Opportunity Employer/Disability/Veteran


text: My 6 month old displays a lot of these behaviors, too. She actually used to full on swing her arms back and punch me when she was 2-3 months old! I have had a lot of success just holding her hand or giving her my hand to smack, poke, or pinch. Most of the time she's a pretty gentle girl now, but I just slip my hand in there when she's a bit more feisty.


text:
WALLINGFORD, Pa. – The Philadelphia Union kicked off their 2012 MLS Reserve League campaign with a convincing win over the New England Revolution reserves, riding four consecutive goals to a 4-2 victory at Chester Park on Monday morning.
After New England midfielder Kenny Mansally scored the first of his two goals on a 19th minute penalty kick, Philadelphia answered with two goals from Costa Rican forward Josue Martinez, one from Antoine Hoppenot and another from Cristhian Hernandez before Mansally completed his brace to round out the scoring.
The Union threatened to open the scoring in the 12th minute when midfielder Roger Torres – who sustained a knee injury later in the match – sent Home Grown Player Zach Pfeffer down the right flank, setting up a cross from the 17-year-old to a streaking Hoppenot, whose deflection just missed the net.
Three minutes later on the other end, Mansally targeted Home Grown forward Diego Fagundez in the area, but Union SuperDraft selection Greg Jordan was able to get a touch on the ball and clear danger.
The Revolution struck first in the 19th minute after Union goalkeeper Chase Harrison came off his line and collided with former D.C. United forward Blake Brettschneider in the area. The referee handed Harrison a yellow card and pointed to the spot, setting up Mansally's penalty kick, which was driven into the center of the goal to give the visitors a 1-0 advantage.
The Union responded quickly, as Hoppenot sprung free and struck a tight-angled shot on target. Revolution goalkeeper Bobby Shuttleworth made the initial save, but the rebound caromed to Martinez, who finished from 10 yards out to level the match at 1-1 in the 22nd minute.
Two minutes after a speculative long-range effort from midfielder Michael Roche missed the net, Philadelphia took their first lead. Pfeffer's through ball found Hoppenot behind the defense and the Princeton graduate dribbled around a charging Shuttleworth for a tap-in goal.
Martinez nearly added another goal before the break, but his breakaway effort was sent just wide of the far post.
Philadelphia continued applying pressure early in the second half. In the 49th minute, 2012 first round pick Chandler Hoffman sent Hoppenot down the left flank into space. Hoffman cut back and fired on an angle, forcing a goal line clearance from Revolution defender Darrius Barnes.
Philadelphia's second half advantage in the run of play paid off in the 62nd minute when a give-and-go between Hernandez and Martinez led to a right-footed shot from Herandez, which curled around Shuttleworth into the back of the net for a 3-1 Union lead.
Philadelphia struck again just three minutes later when Martinez intercepted an errant pass in the back, faked a lay off to occupy the defense, and slotted home from close-range for a 4-1 advantage.
New England had a chance to cut the deficit in the 70th minute. Brettschneider latched onto a bouncing ball in Philadelphia's area, but the New England striker sent his effort wide of the post.
Mansally had another opportunity to pull a goal back in the 73rd minute after he won a loose ball from Jordan. The Gambian struck a sinking one-timer from 25 yards out, but the attempt narrowly missed the crossbar.
2012 Generation adidas signee Tyler Polak saved a fifth Union goal in the 76th minute when he slid to knock away a Hoppenot cross before Hoffman could latch onto it from within the six-yard box.
New England managed their first goal from the run of play before the final whistle sounded. Academy defender Mitchell Taintor lofted a cross from the right flank through a crowded area. Mansally collected the hopeful ball and ripped a one-timer past Harrison.
The Revolution reserves (0-0-1) will return to action against D.C. United on April 14 at Gillette Stadium, while the Union reserves' next match will be announced in the near future.
Scoring Summary:
NE – Kenny Mansally (Penalty Kick) 19'
PHI – Josue Martinez (Antonie Hoppenot) 22'
PHI – Antoine Hoppenot (Zach Pfeffer) 62'
PHI – Cristhian Hernandez (Josue Martinez) 87'
PHI – Josue Martinez (Unassisted) 65'
NE – Kenny Mansally (Mitch Taintor) 91'
Disciplinary Summary:
PHI – Chase Harrison (Yellow card caution) 17'
PHI – Amobi Okugo (Yellow card caution) 56'
Philadelphia Union Reserves – Chase Harrison; Jimmy McLaughlin, Ray Gaddis, Greg Jordan, Cristhian Hernandez; Amobi Okugo, Zach Pfeffer, Roger Torres (Chandler Hoffman 34), Jack McInerney (*Keegan Rosenberry); Antoine Hoppenot, Josue Martinez (*Darius Madison 66).
Subs not used: Danny Mwanga
New England Revolution Reserves – Bobby Shuttleworth (**Dominik Machado 73); Darrius Barnes, John Lozano (**Mitch Taintor 73), Kevin Garcia^, Tyler Polak (** Ramiro Osorio 83); Jeremiah White, Michael Roach, Alec Purdie, Kenny Mansally; Diego Fagundez, Blake Brettschneider
Subs not used: **Matt Mozynski
*Philadelphia Union Academy player
**New England Revolution Academy player
^ New England Revolution guest player


text:
Counter Shooter
- Use the mouse to play.
You can play Counter Shooter online shooting game for free. It has 1662 total plays and has been rated 68.5% (0 like and 0 dislike), fun and happy everyday. if you like Counter Shooter, you may also enjoy similar shooting games, such as: WW4 Shooter - World War 4, Zombie Shooter 3, Shooter Airport Ops and Balloon Shooter. To play other games, go to the page, the page, or just check out the shooting games or sniper games page.


text:
|2012-08-27, 22:47
|Link #241
Le fou, c'est moi
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Age: 29
Yet, for some reason, the "defense against the State" argument seems to be a prominent part of the reasoning of those who oppose gun control measures, and the 2008 election was accompanied by a massive boost in gun sales.
Why so afraid?
|2012-08-27, 23:03
|Link #242
Join Date: Feb 2008
I doubt anyone sane honestly believes that their small arms will actually do much in an actual fight against a real military force.
|2012-08-27, 23:27
|Link #243
Le fou, c'est moi
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Age: 29
I think I have to make myself clear: the reason I don't want to jump into this debate is because I don't believe gun control measures are the answer to the problem of crimes and violent crimes in the United States, or even the recent, obscene, spree of massacres. On the other hand, I don't take them off the table. I don't believe the 2nd Amendment originally meant what the NRA thinks it means, and though I don't oppose the evolution of the meaning (many other, more important clauses supporting our various rights experience the same phenomenon), I do not consider it some absolute rule. To me, the right to own guns is rather a privilege to own guns, as conditional as the "right" to drive. So if I am to make an argument for policy aimed against the problem of crime, which is why people want gun control in the first place, I would consider various gun control provisions as part of a comprehensive measure.
Just randomly thinking out here, but important measures other than gun control would be prison reform, overhaul of the legal criminal system based on the notion of rehabilitation over revenge, better funding and expansion of social support institutions, especially for the mentally ill, cultural and social projects aiming to "communalize" the American citizenry, etc. Even legalization of marijuana, if only to cut a major source of funding out of organized crime.
But that's not what this thread is about, so I'm not going to defend a single piece of a puzzle in isolation.
|2012-08-27, 23:38
|Link #244
books-eater youkai
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Betweem wisdom and insanity
Why so afraid ? Because a portion of the population is a bit more unstable ( for not say crazies) and less rational when it's about their guns. Gun might be more than a mean to defend themself or to do some kind of sport for such individuals, something less healthy .Even if a president would want to ''take their guns'' it won't be possible for many reason and yet they still think than they will have to fight for keeping their weapons.
Such person aren't the majority of thoses than own firearm but you can't try to make as they wouldn't exist.
|2012-08-27, 23:42
|Link #245
Love Yourself
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northeast USA
Age: 33
|2012-08-28, 00:42
|Link #246
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: classified
The SCOTUS determined the type of arms in US vs. Miller when they declared that weapons that are "not useful to a militia" are not protected by the 2nd amendment which is why they ruled that a double-barrel hunting shotgun could be regulated as they saw no use for it in the militia.
The militia (not to be confused with the National Guard which is now part of the regular armed forces) is every abled bodied male between the ages of 17-45.
If you were both pro-gun control and anti-abortion you'd have an argument, but you're not.
You pick and choose what you want to defend or attack not based on any rational basis, but on your emotions and/or likes/dislikes.
That's the major difference between you and I Legem.
I'm pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, and pro-2nd amendment. I'm consistent in my absolute commitment to freedom.
You see Legem, if there were armed individuals in that theater there is at least the chance that many more lives would have been saved.
What you're saying between the lines of your posts is that gunowners are too stupid to know how to use their weapons and that they would have done what the NYC police did at the Empire State Building--it's called "Spray and Pray."
Again you show an unwarranted, and unjustifiable fear of firearms by continuing to claim that more people would have been injured.
There are not perfect solutions to anything Legem.
Not crime, not drunk driving, not drugs, not rape, not child molestation, not war, not disease, nothing.
We have to settle for the BEST solutions to a problem
Gun control was tried in the US from 1934 to 2004 with increasing the number of bans, restrictions, and requirements.
It's done NOTHING to deter the violence.
What has worked?
Increasing the standards of living, improving law enforcement techniques such as forensic sciences, greater enforcement of existing laws, and stronger anti-gang initiatives.
Therefore, now that we know beyond any doubt that gun-control does not work, there is no justification to violate people's rights to have weapons.
I see some of Shelly Kagan's nonsense in your statement.
I vehementy disagree with his "reasoning" about the nature of morality.
Society operates off of fear and has done so for thousands of years.
Why do we cooperate?
Because we fear starvation, we fear invasion, we fear disease, we fear criminals, we fear being poor, we fear being alone...etc.
To say otherwise is to deny your instincts as a human being.
As for peace, again we're dealing with a subjective term.
If someone wrongs me, I will take it upon myself to right that wrong.
As for me "argu[ing] that guns are necessary for society to repel a government that gets out of hand?", I never brought it up in the first place. You did, and you continue to go back to it for some reason.
The founding fathers are the ones who made the argument that the people should bear arms equal to the government, not I.
And their argument is as sound today as it was in their time in the 1700s, or Aristotle's time 2000 years ago when he said "neither Oligarch nor Tyrant can suffer a people to be armed."
When government proceeds to attempt to stop a wrong before it happens, then that government has now committed a wrong by becoming authoritarian.
This is why our founders gave us the 2nd amendment, it is a safeguard against government going from being passive in its enforcement of law to active.
I don't see why that's such a big deal, it is what it is, which is why I don't bother discussing it.
Unless of course you're going to try and stake a claim that totalitarian government is benevolent?
Let me draw you a picture.
If both opponents have equal force they have an equal chance of winning.
Now, to your question about 5 on one, the five have greater force then your one don't they?
So there are two possibilities:
If you're a good shot, and they're not, you kill them.
If you're not a good shot, or if they're better than you are, you die.
That's life.
You obey your lord and master (the government) without any thought about what they might be using you for because you falsely believe it is all for your benefit, right?
Stalin loved his useful idiots too.
That's okay, I already figured that out when you started on the "I'm not talking about crime" nonsense.
However, I do believe that now we're getting to the meat of why you dislike gun ownership.
Doesn't matter what kind or flavor, they're all anti-American, and anti-freedom.
I've yet to find a flavor that preserves individual rights over the good of the collective.
Mutual aid is total bullshit, and has only one relevence to the discussion of gun control...but I'll get to that below.
There is NO legitimate reason for the police to have this equipment.
If you say otherwise then you are either ignorant of the proper role of peace officers in a free society or you know damn well what they want that equipment for.
Tyranny rarely announces itself to the society it chooses to oppress.
And for the record, THIS is the last time I saw the police using their combat robots, armored personnel carrier, full body armor, submachine guns, and snipers.
I was at a friend's house across the stream on the south side of those apartments and actually got a chance to talk with the sniper sitting at the end of a culdesac during the end of the situation.
They looked like something out of a B-flick WWII movie about Nazis Germany.
He's saying that an armed society is a polite one, in other words he always feels at peace because he knows that should an individual with a gun confront him, he has the means to defense himself properly.
You must understand that I've worked with police officers on every level by supplying, repairing and servicing their weaponry. Many of those officers were VERY concerned about what is going on in this country. Are they paranoid? No, and neither am I, but I'm not blind either.
It is obvious at this point what is happening.
We don't need drones in our skies, we don't need police with armored personnel carriers, and we don't need cops with machine guns.
Not all guns increase injury or death in a situation and you cannot make that claim without evidence to back it up.
There have been confrontations where dozens of rounds were fired and no one even got hit.
It's these kinds of statements you're making that show me your total ignorance of firearms, and your unwarranted fear of them.
Now, I'll illustrate why I said that to you.
Had these people been using shotguns in that bar-fight, somebody would have gotten shot. Perhaps killed if the right rounds were being used (00 buck).
But that's because the shotgun is the deadliest weapon in close quarters battle outside of an explosive.
Does that mean all guns cause more injury than other weapons.
Knives are normally deadlier than pistols at point blank and rifles are all but useless.
Because they require considerable skill to put that bullet onto the target, whereas a knife does not. Neither does a baseball bat, or other weapon.
Rifles are designed/engineered for long-range combat, pistols for close to imtermediate range, and both require training to use them well.
A shotgun just requires you to point and shoot.
We already know that accidental gun injuries (outside of crime) are statistically insignificant (only 600 deaths per year), so why
are you making this non-argument in the first place?
Clearly it cannot be about safety, since the safety issue is a moot.
You say it's not about crime, so that issue is moot.
But yet you still want to ban all guns that are protected by the 2nd amendment and leave the ones that aren't.
Now, why would that be?
Oh that's right, because you're a collectivist by your own admission.
Now, why do collectivists want firearms banned and/or heavily restricted.
I know, because they provide a means for individualists to overthrow any totalitarian regime that attempts to erect a collectivist society, that's why.
I've provided you with all the evidence necessary to show that you're desire to "ban all the gun stores" as you said a few pages back is completely irrational and without justification.
I called you on your fuzzy-logic, provided you with all the evidence necessary, and you have given NOTHING in return.
If guns aren't for defense, then why do the cops have them?
Oh that's right, to DEFEND themselves from armed criminals.
You must have been tired at this point or something, your points are degenerating.
You claim that the equalization principle is fantasy, then go on to create a fake scenario.
How many criminals are out there plotting to ambush people who've done nothing to them?
Not many, that's for sure (unless you're in trouble with the mob).
It's these types of over-the-top scenarios that have undermined your argument and thus your position as a whole.
What I don't want are a bunch of hoplophobes thinking they're saving society by turning me and everyone like me into potential victims for criminals who are never going to follow the law.
It is complete idiocy to disarm in the face of an agressor.
If you don't mind.
My gun saved my life when I was confronted by two armed assailants, doesn't that make my gun my life?
I would argue that it does since I might not have been here right now if not for my having the .357 Colt King Cobra I was carrying.
So in some cases, a gun is a person's life or more accurately the tool used to save their life.
The FACTS are, only 600 people are injured/killed from firearms per year.
Compared to auto accidents (42,000 deaths/year) that's insignificant and does not exceed the number of people saved by them. Conservative (as in small) estimates range from as low as 60,000 times per year to as high as 300,000 times per year. The NRA claims it's more like 1.3 to 2 million times per year that a gun saves a person's life. Either way, 600 accidental deaths is not more than the number of times guns are used to save a life.
Last edited by GundamFan0083; 2012-08-28 at 00:54.
|2012-08-28, 01:15
|Link #247
The Comet has Come
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 41
|2012-08-28, 18:51
|Link #248
Knight Errant
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Age: 30
I do not believe we do, I do not believe we have the right to make ourselves judge, jury and executioner. Death is for the law, and for the Gods themselves, to mete out.
It is perfectly possible to defend yourself with nonlethal force. Pepper spray, tasers, a cane...
We do not have the right to take the life of another. Under any circumstances. Now, if a person accidentaly kills another in self defence, I don't think they should be tried for murder. But, that person does not have the right to do so intentionally.
All of America's guns hold less value then even 1 of those lives, let alone 600.
|2012-08-28, 19:18
|Link #250
The Comet has Come
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 41
Humans have always had the right to defend themselves with leathal force. Otherwise there would be no humans (predetory animals would have wiped us out long ago if we couldn't kill them with our tools).
|2012-08-28, 19:39
|Link #251
Love Yourself
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northeast USA
Age: 33
Get real. Society determines whether we have enough laws - not you.
The way you've presented it, you're basically arguing for the freedom to own a toy that can injure and kill others. What a freedom to have.
I get that you think that some miracle shooter would have been able to stop the Aurora theater shootings. And because it's a purely hypothetical situation, you're free to believe that and nobody will ever be able to say that you're absolutely wrong. What I'd appreciate hearing from you is some acknowledgement that these situations are tricky, and that the risk of collateral damage is high. That's realistic. I'm not convinced that you're grounded to reality.
And that's not what I've been arguing.
Aside from differences in the weapons power, politicians and various interest groups have done a spectacular job of fragmenting and polarizing society. Do you really think that armed citizens could unite and organize enough to take down the government? Really?
If citizens realistically can't fight back against the government, then firearms represent a vestigial trait in society. It's something that once had meaning and importance, yet is now ineffective and little more than symbolic. Firearms are to society what the appendix is to the human body.
If I'm a serf, what does that make you - a paranoid, antisocial man who needs the grown-up version of a security blanket in order to leave his house?
But then I hear about these fools who talk about civil war, or our own home-grown terrorists who want to rip up the government. I do not identify with those people. They are not fighting for me, and I do not want them to impose their way of life upon me. They might as well be the Taliban, wanting to impose Sharia law. When I read those types of news articles, I begin to lean toward feeling that it's all right. I trust the police more than I trust those types of people.
However, the way this is worded is revealing. The idea that an armed society is a polite society means that everyone treats everyone else with respect and care, because they know that a confrontation could lead to a worst-case scenario where someone dies or is seriously hurt. If you say "I feel at peace because if someone attacks me, I can defend myself," your statement indicates that you're already thinking about being attacked. This isn't about a polite society - this is now about you getting attacked, and being able to ward off your attacker. I think you know the definition of paranoia. I don't think that this man is paranoid, but those are some paranoid thoughts.
Let me show you why through an analogy on a topic that you're not as blinded by. Some people can drive at 100 MPH through a crowded city and not hit anyone or anything. No problem, right? We should allow everyone to do that, and persecute only those who screw up? Not all 100 MPH drivers cause injury or death in a situation, after all.
No, the entire reason why we have these regulations is to avert tragedies in the first place. To put it back to guns, it's true that the number of people with firearms who use their firearms improperly is a small percentage of firearms owners, but that's no consolation to the innocent dead and wounded. I'm not talking about the gun owners who use their guns responsibly, I'm talking about the people who do not. If you can come up with a solution that eliminates those injuries and deaths while allowing others to continue owning guns, I will fully support you, I will tell all the liberals and the conservatives, and I will contact the state legislators from every state that I have ever resided in.
Are you out of your mind? The fact that the number is "only" 600 (a number seems damn big to be for being limited to accidental shooting deaths) means that gun legislation should be a low priority compared to other areas of society. We're not arguing about what legislative priority should be, though. This thread is all about guns.
So tell me, if those 600 deaths could be reduced to zero, don't you think that it would be worth it? Oh, we don't necessarily need to restrict guns in order to get that number down to zero... but don't you think it's worthwhile to avoid preventable deaths?
In all seriousness, what is so hard to understand here? A large number of people die or are seriously injured each year of multiple causes. If we can do something to prevent those from happening, why shouldn't we? Yes, there are many causes for these deaths, and guns are just a small part, but if the gun-related ones can be averted, then why not? What reason do you have that is so important that it's worth the thousands of lives that are lost to guns each year? I can think of a few possible reasons (some that you've sort of touched on), but I'm not convinced that they're worth the trade-off. So why are you?
The way you, GundamFan0083, see it isn't the way others "see it" and therefore it doesn't really matter. So deflate that sense of self-important authority and rejoin the rest of us.
Oh, sorry - I decided to spice it up with that last bit. I hope you don't mind.
Seriously though, why do police have guns? Surely you realize that an armed police force is not a universal feature of societies that have police. So why do our police have guns? You hypothesize that it's for defense from armed criminals. OK, I think that's acceptable. But there are two points on this:
1) It is a part of the business of police officers to deal with those violent, unruly members of society. Regular people like you and me generally don't go patrolling crappy neighborhoods at odd hours, nor do we engage potentially hostile people. We're smart and we want to avoid trouble, and that applies whether you have a gun at your side or whether you're unarmed. Are we both in agreement so far? Police - if they're doing their jobs - don't follow that rule. They go into the high-crime neighborhoods and they seek out the suspicious-looking people. They're at high risk for encountering violent confrontations. It seems justified that they should have something - a gun, a taser, a baton - to shift the balance in their favor.
This gets into point #2:
2) How come some countries can have police without firearms? The reason I propose is that those countries don't have a lot of guns. So now we're in a chicken-and-egg scenario: if we reduce the guns, we won't need guns to ward off other guns. Yet if you give up your gun, there will still be some guns around to threaten you and everyone else; thus, you don't want to give up your gun, and we're stuck with a bunch of guns.
If you reduced the number of firearms, I would anticipate that homicides wrought through those other means would rise. But would they all triple or quadruple in order to match the number of homicides carried out by guns? Anything is possible, but I don't find that to be a realistic scenario.
Last edited by Ledgem; 2012-08-28 at 19:50. Reason: Correcting some BB-Code errors
|2012-08-28, 20:06
|Link #252
Knight Errant
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Age: 30
Personally, I think we're framing this debate too mechanistically here. The fundamental thing here is the right to kill another. How can we so easily give such a thing away? How can anyone under any circumstance have the right to kill a human being? A gun's purpose is to kill, that is why it is created. How can we legalize the keeping of the tool, but make the use of it illegal? Doing such a thing is absurd. If we legalise the keeping of the gun, we must give people the right to kill other human beings. I think that such a thing is too awful to think about. No one should have the right to kill another. Maybe you guys think that we do have that right. I'm an atheist, but the only hypothetical entity that I can think of that has the right to give and take life is God himself. There are some things which are His prerogative alone. No man the purity of thought and wisdom to judge to be given such power.
Do we live in Syria? Why should we formulate our laws based on the circumstances of a war zone?
So if you're in danger of being killed by your natural environment, sure do whatever you like. But in affairs of humanity, there is no justification for the intentional taking of human life. Our society is sophisticated enough today that we have many means for self defence that does not require it. Being that killing is the ultimate wrong, then our society should ban any instruments whose sole use and purpose is to kill. We should ban guns.
If you can claim another reason to keep a gun, say you need to defend against bears, sure you can have your rifle. But any other use solely entails the eventual killing of human beings. No man should be given the right to kill another human being unless he is solely directed to do so by the law. No man should have the power to take the life of another. To do so is Hubris.
Last edited by DonQuigleone; 2012-08-28 at 20:22.
|2012-08-28, 20:27
|Link #253
a small cat
The debate seems to be on gun control in America..
But maybe an example of what happened in other countries could also be placed in this thread.
Here in the Philippines we had several "road rage" incidents. Two people get in a traffic argument, one loses temper and pulls out a gun = murder commited in the street. There are several stories, but the Jason Ivler case is one I remember the most. He shot a man named Ebarle during a traffic argument, NBI agents cornered him in his house and he was captured after a gunfight. A classic example of guns being in the wrongs hands (wrong hands = short tempered "tough guys").
|2012-08-28, 21:04
|Link #254
The Comet has Come
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 41
|2012-08-28, 23:11
|Link #255
Join Date: Feb 2008
Who are you to decide the worth of life, dignity, or possession for someone else? Again, should someone who is about to be raped lay there and be raped instead of fighting back with deadly force because, as you said, no one should have the right to kill another under ANY circumstances? What about the police? should they also give up their weapons? after all, they can just ask the criminals nicely to stop, just like the rape victim before right? same goes for the military, everyone should just carry a deck of card and settle the fight with a game of poker.
It's your right to have a very idealistic view of the world and how it should be, but when it comes to policy making, I prefer ones drafted with reality in mind.
TBH, gundamfan went a bit over the deep end there, you on the other hand went off the deep end on the other side here. Deprivation of a person's right to protect themselves? are you nuts?
|2012-08-29, 02:43
|Link #257
Kurumada's lost child
Join Date: Nov 2003
It finally dawned on me the reason why random people commit random acts of pointless violence in the US; it is cultural issue. More specifically, it is the "I got mine, get yours, forget you" mentality that many Americans have, which causes people to dismiss the obvious warnings given by mentally unstable people before they go out on a rampage. Unless we are able to care collectively for each then there is no stopping these tragedies from occurring.
Where does this "epiphany" of mine fit into this thread? Simple, I believe that gun control laws will not prevent the root cause of the problem mentioned above. The root cause of acts of violence is individualism. If people believe that strict regulation will stop gun related violence, they are delusional. However, I do believe that regulating the kind of fire power a citizen should be allow to carry can make a significant difference in the number of lives saved.
|2012-08-29, 05:24
|Link #258
Knight Errant
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Age: 30
But we are discussing about how we live in a peaceful society governed by the law. In such a society we must strive to reduce all deaths to a minimum. The best way to do so is to remove the instruments by which death is inflicted.
And as I said, defend yourself, sure, but don't kill.
The reality I speak of is perfectly feasible. The police in my own country do not carry guns. My country continues to function quite well. A bat is more then enough to subdue the criminals of this world. Sometimes they can carry guns if it is strictly necessary. Thankfully that is not a frequent occurrence.
As for the military, they should not exist, but they are a necessary evil to deter invasion by others.
|2012-08-29, 10:35
|Link #259
Join Date: Feb 2008
Don, if you're not willing to confine the debate to something within the realm of reality, I see no reason to continue any further.
Pepper spray's range is extremely short, nor is it guaranteed immediate incapacitation like you see on TV, many can function just fine even after being sprayed, and the period of incapacitation can also be very short. It's a last-resort type of defense that may or may not work.
Taser is the same. Very short range for the shooting type, which is also worthless when there are multiple assailants. The period of incapacitation is even shorter, which practically ends as soon as the charge is stopped. A taser is designed more for LE use where others can move in to subdue the target while he/she is incapacitated. Also, just like pepper spray, some people just aren't going to be affected by them, or they could just be wearing thick clothing, at which point your shooty taser becomes a toy gun.
Please tell me, when was the last time you got shot? Trust me, it's not so "easy to ignore"
Sometimes some people get so much adrenaline pumping through their body that they don't realize they've been shot, but those are the rare exceptions and not the norm, and trust me, it hurts very much so after the adrenaline wears off .
lol... gunshot wounds are easy to ignore and cause little pain? soldiers on every battlefield today would like to know what you're smoking.
Last edited by Daniel E.; 2012-08-29 at 15:05.
|2012-08-29, 10:46
|Link #260
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 35
Last edited by killer3000ad; 2012-08-29 at 17:47.
|Thread Tools


text:
Container Gardening Tips
Posted by Avant Garden Decor on Oct 11th 2017
Container gardens add life and color to decks, porches, patios and dull corners in the yard. You can use container gardens for shrubs and flowers, and also for herbs, vegetables and small fruit trees. There are so many different types of planters and flower boxes; you can create container gardens in a myriad of styles.
What to Plant in Container Gardens
Flowers and shrubs always look good in container gardens, but if you like the idea of an indoor garden, consider establishing container gardens for your favorite herbs and vegetables – perfect for kitchen areas!
Plant stands, hanging baskets, and floor planters are ideal for container gardens. Biodegradable coco-lined varieties add a natural aesthetic and eco-friendly touch.
Whatever you plant in them, container gardens are so attractive they will find a home in any outdoor space, from the patio or porch, to decks and even areas within your garden.
You can plant flowering perennials and shrubs in container gardens, but annuals can be even more colorful, particularly in multi-purpose planters. You can choose a color-scheme for flower-filled container gardens or mix different colors of one species, pansies or petunias, for example.
Herbs that do particularly well in container gardens include parsley, chervil, oregano and thyme. If the climate is right, include planters with miniature citrus trees and other small trees for a height effect.
The Best Time for Container Planting
Generally the best time to plant anything is early spring, and container planting is no exception. This is also the best time to repot plants that have become root bound because of container planting.
However, spring isn't the only time for container planting. Many seeds may be sown from spring until late summer, and herbs are perfect for container planting in winter and colder months.
Since container planting is versatile, you can move the containers indoors and germinate seeds and cultivate seedlings in any season using grow lights, or a room with plenty of sunlight.
Remember when container planting to utilize coco-lined varieties of plant stands, hanging baskets, and floor planters for an organic look.
Container planting of bulbs can be particularly rewarding and if planted in pots indoors in late winter, will produce a colorful spring display.
Container planting has other benefits too, in particular enabling you to mix plants that like different soil types and have different water needs, in containers adjacent to one another.
Container planting may also be used to introduce style, with coco-lined stake planters or traditional metal plant stands. Better still, container planting is the easiest way to reinforce a color scheme, or simply add color to a patio or deck.
Plant Care for Container Gardens
There are so many different plants and flowers you can grow in containers, and plant care procedures are equally varied. Here are some tips relating to a range of popular plants to help you with your container gardening plant care.
- Aloes like full sun and plant care is required mostly in summer when they should be fed occasionally and watered twice weekly. Water sparingly in winter.
- Petunias are popular low-lying annuals that bloom all summer. Plant care is minimal, but they do grow best in full sunlight.
- Take into consideration the type of plant container you are using when practicing plant care.
- Plant care for biodegradable coco-lined planters will need to be watered more often depending on the amount of sun exposure.
- Asparagus plants, often incorrectly called ferns, like good light but not direct sun. Plant care includes occasional misting with water and feeding from spring to early autumn.
- Begonias, grown for their mass of tiny flowers, like good light and prefer high humidity. Plant care includes frequent watering when they are in flower.
- Capsicum annum, grown for its colorful fruits, needs its leaves misted often. Plant care includes frequent watering.
- Chrysanthemums flower all year round and they are undemanding in terms of plant care. Keep the soil moist at all times.
- Fuchsias make lovely patio and deck plants although they should not stand in direct sunlight. They like humidity, so plant care includes misting leaves. Prune heavily in early spring.
- Hyacinthus is a bulbous plant grown for winter flowers. It is a short-term houseplant and needs little plant care.
- Impatiens need good indirect light and loads of water. Plant care includes regular cutting back.
- Yucca species need light and will tolerate dry air. Plant care is limited to watering and feeding.
Tips for a Colorful Container Flower Garden
A container flower garden can be quite colorful and beautiful, whether it's on a porch under cover or on an open patio. The trick is to choose flowers for a container flower garden that will thrive in planters, hanging baskets, and flower boxes.
- When you choose plants for a container flower garden check that the conditions and position you plan for each plant is suitable.
- Annual flowers add instant color to a container flower garden, but remember that you will have to replace them regularly.
- Most flowering plants in a container flower garden, including primulas, violas and petunias, need to be watered carefully. Allow the surface of the soil in your container flower garden to dry out before you water again. If using coco liners for your container flower garden, remember to check plants water needs daily.
- Most foliage plants, grown alongside flowers in a container flower garden for their leaves and deep green color, like to be watered often, so the soil is perpetually moist (not wet).
- Misting plants in your container flower garden will increase the humidity. But don't mist those that are positioned in direct sunlight, which can result in leaf burn.
- Organize your container flower garden by placing several different species of the same color together for effect, or choose one species in two or three colors for contrast.


text:
Beloved Tenor Andrea Bocelli Set For National TV Appearances In Support Of New Album 'Passione'
"Passione" Out January 29th On Sugar / Verve Music Group Features Collaborations with Jennifer Lopez, Nelly Furtado, the late Edith Piaf and Grammy-winning Producer David Foster
Jan 23, 2013, 07:33 ET
LOS ANGELES, Jan. 23, 2013 /PRNewswire/ -- Internationally acclaimed tenor Andrea Bocelli is making several high profile TV appearances in support of his new studio album "Passione" out January 29 on Sugar / Verve Music Group. Bocelli is scheduled to make a special appearance on the multimedia retailer QVC® on Sunday, January 27 at 5 PM (ET) to debut his new studio album "Passione." During the Andrea Bocelli Q Sessions Live broadcast, Bocelli will be joined by legendary producer David Foster as he performs a selection of songs from his latest release and reveals the inspiration behind the romantically beautiful CD. Fans will also have the opportunity to order "Passione," which will be bundled especially for QVC with six bonus tracks, before it hits stores. Bocelli is also set to perform new music on Good Morning America (1/29), The View (1/30) and Late Night With Jimmy Fallon (2/1).
iHeartRadio will host a private show featuring a live performance by Andrea Bocelli on Monday, January 28th. The intimate show will be part of iHeartRadio Live, a Clear Channel entertainment production that features performances by today's top recording artists. Fans can tune in HERE.
Filled with romance and beauty, "Passione" is a lush collection of beautiful love songs featuring duets with global pop stars Jennifer Lopez and Nelly Furtado. The album also features an extraordinary duet with the late Edith Piaf in which the Tuscan tenor sings with one of the greatest French singers of all time for a new version of "La Vie en Rose." The album reunites Bocelli with 16-time Grammy Award-winning producer David Foster, who produced Bocelli's 2006 release "Amore," which sold more than 4.2 million copies.
Bocelli sings in six languages on the album (Italian, English, French, Spanish, Portuguese, and Neapolitan) with his unmistakable voice, as Foster accompanies him on piano, along with Peruvian guitarist Ramon Stagnaro. The sensual sound is rounded out by Cuban, Brazilian, and Portuguese rhythms and a 63-piece orchestra recorded in London.
Bocelli is an iconic figure in music with a myriad of breathtaking career achievements to his name. The Italian tenor is the most successful classical solo artist ever and one of the best-selling artists in music history, period, with more than 80 million albums sold worldwide. He is also credited with enabling the core classical repertoire to cross over and find a home atop the international pop charts, creating a new genre of music along the way. He has performed for four U.S. presidents, two popes, and the British royal family, as well as at ceremonies for the Olympic Games and the World Cup. He has been praised by such luminaries as Luciano Pavarotti, Franco Corelli (his beloved teacher and guide), Zubin Mehta, Jose Carreras, Lorin Maazel, Renee Fleming, and Celine Dion.
www.andreabocelli.com - www.sugarmusic.com - www.vervemusicgroup.com
SOURCE The Verve Music Group


text:
Since many people have been asking for an answer key, here is a link to one:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/etib9lmbxnwc ... 6mJCa?dl=0
There are answers to all the chapters
akratic399 wrote:This is great but people should be warned that there are numerous errors, so be careful and only use this as a helpful tool to be taken with a degree of skepticism.
e.g., Unit 3, question 24 of the translation exercises they give as "24. If we had not driven the bad men out of the storeroom, we would not have held the fatherland with glory, and now we would be slaves.", but they do not even include that the bad men are driven out with stones and swords. "saxis gladiisque", which is in the Latin, just disappears. There are also many problems throughout with tense and number switches.


text:
Photographer Don Balch, who spends much of his time in and around the water in La Jolla, recently caught some prime examples of just how wild the waters off the coast are.
A sea turtle gets eye-to-eye off La Jolla Shores. While it's not common to come across sea turtles, Balch said, "You can be lucky enough to see one surface — and I know where to look!"
Kayakers, meanwhile, get a clear water view of leopard sharks off the Shores during the first week of November, while at La Jolla Cove, a leopard shark shows its spots.
Have you caught some rare or unusual photos of La Jolla's wildlife? Send them in to firstname.lastname@example.com.