Sentences with phrase «about their point system»

Bernstein has a thing about points systems; he doesn't like LEED or Berkeley's green standard, which he criticized in his drive - by shooting of Mitch Kapor's house and agrees with Gehry, who said

If you're curious about the points system and how California traffic ticket fines and penalties are assessed, we have your answers right here.

In these pages you can learn about the points system in your state, and how to track the points against your driving record.

Please visit the ME BMV website for specific details about the point system in Maine and how to keep your driving record free of convictions.

Contact your insurance company about their point system and find out how completing a driver safety course may reduce your rate.

Not exact matches

Redburn doesn't come to a conclusion about which system is better, but he does raise a couple of interesting points.

She is now seeking to inform the masses about point - of - sale (POS) systems by writing for Merchant Maverick, a site that reviews merchant services.

Some of those vendors may have a point of view about opening their systems up to let information move in and out of them.

The system can pick up big stories from as few as 35 data points, about three to eight hours ahead.

And while Bill Vogt or Denise Noel or Dan Weinfurter could offer testimonials about the new science of hiring, the point is not that this system has worked in a handful of cases.

Our in - house ethics blogger (he really does go by @ethicsblogger) Chris MacDonald turned a moment of personal frustration with Keurig's new «2.0» single - cup coffee - brewing system into a larger point about the obligations companies have to serve their best customers, instead of trying to block competitors.

While this may be true in some cases, I've found that it's usually some combination of a misperception among CEOs about the role of the VC, the CEO's own level of self - confidence and the desire of the CEO to elevate his importance in the system by being a single point of contact.

There's no time for deep analysis about whether a customer should be offered a discount at a certain time; the challenge is to employ new predictive technologies to push Reliance's systems beyond the point where they're «still relying on rules that had to be written by programmers,» to address specific situations.

At the same time, many in the industry point to ongoing concerns about how the largest banks in the system are treated and the impact that has on smaller institutions.

Colonial, the largest fuel pipeline system in the United States, functions as the primary artery carrying about 3 million barrels of gasoline and other fuels daily from the Gulf Coast to various points throughout the U.S. Southeast and East Coast.

Hence, concerns about system - wide financial stability risks seem limited at this point.

Having talked about liquidity from the banking system's point of view, I will finish with a few thoughts on liquidity in the superannuation (pension) system.

You've probably heard cracks before that Twitter humor largely consists of jokes made on Tumblr being shared as screenshots on Facebook, but within this joke is a larger point about how all of these systems interconnect and interact.

Small businesses using NCR's Silver tablet - based point - of - sale system are steadily asking about bitcoin but not showing much interest in Apple Pay, NCR...

And this is my whole point about how the system is just designed and designed and designed to kind of grow and to get bigger on top of itself.

Small businesses using NCR's Silver tablet - based point - of - sale system are steadily asking about bitcoin but not showing much interest in Apple Pay, NCR product manager Reggie Kimble told Finextra.

(Note now that we are not talking about a free banking system — I want to make a point about fractional reserve systems in general and show how the problem is that the system isn't free, not that it's based on fractional reserves.)

Other than DACA, other notable immigration discussions have involved talks about «chain» migration (family based migration), refugees, Temporary Protected Status (TPS), diversity visas, and the RAISE Act was introduced about a year ago by two senators, which would limit legal immigration and include a points system.

As others have pointed out, he was talking about panspermia, the idea that «life could spread from planet to planet, or from stellar system to stellar system, carried on meteors.»

The movie served to give me a different platform to discuss faith from, not to argue that my belief system is right and someone else's is wrong, but instead to point out that the world is hungry for questions about the soul and what we don't see right in front of us.

@DamianKnight, another point I want you to think about is: True, we all have different worldviews and different belief systems and should exist together.

«Perhaps Jesus is actually making a larger point about an alternative economic system.»

The things I find most appalling about religion reach a new zenith in Islam --(i) a dulling down of individual thought and a dogmatic requirement to conform to the views of the masses; (ii) a stultifying ignorant education system in which anything inconsistent with the Qur» an is not just discouraged, but censored; (iii) the subjugation of women to the point of educating them to be nothing but mindless f * king, breeding machines for their insecure husbands; (iv) a political class that feeds off the religious - based ignorance it imposes on its populations; and (v) a general back - sliding against the rest of the planet because heads are buried in Dark Ages mythology.

The U.S. system of governance is at a tipping point where we have to decide (and are about to) whether we believe in the free exercise of enterprise and good will of the people or whether we will subjegate our freedom for the care of a bureaucracy.

6 In another place Dewey makes a similar point: «It [a system of descriptive generalizations] makes... an assertion about what the constituents of nature itself must be in and of themselves.

Although space will not permit exploration of the point here, it is important to note that Christian thought about just war predated the rise of the modern state system in the 17th century, and rests on fundamental moral principles not essentially tied to that system.

Due to the shear number of planets, of course one has to have the perfect conditions to support life, which (over billions of years of EVOLUTION) has perfected all of those systems to the point where we can debate about where it all came from.

Excellent points — my struggle though is forgiving those who talk about moving beyond this divide but then they set up an «inclusive» system that is just as rigid as the liberal / conservative paradigm they were seeking to abolish.

Two comments about this third point: First, the statement of this requirement is evidence that neither the concept of God in general nor the conception of the consequent nature of God is ad hoc to Whitehead's system.

Griffin & Sherburne, New York: The Free Press, 1978, 231) The only point that needs to be made about these comments for the purposes of the present discussion is that the consequent nature of God has a functional role in Whitehead's metaphysical system.

And they got upset and were trying to figure things out and finally became so frustrated that the Law was so hard to follow and God kept sending them into captivity and there was so much death and eventually the prophets started prophesying about a day that would come where the hearts of the fathers would return to their children and a sacrifice that would be the final sacrifice so that they could all stop killing so many animals (which God also admitted He never wanted in the first place because that was not the point), and also that God would eventually wipe out the old system and write his law on their hearts and minds so that they could finally follow him without making so many mistakes and messing up everything.

If you have a sane, coherent and logical point to make about the merits of your belief systems over any other than please, present it here.

This point was reinforced about 200 years after Newton when Albert Einstein's discovery of general relativity produced the modern theory of gravity — capable of explaining not only the behavior of our little local solar system but also the structure of the whole cosmos.

While the impact of these classical theories has remained strong, I would like to point to a specific contribution that, in my view, has served as a kind of watershed in our thinking about the cultural dimension of religion: Clifford Geertz's essay «Religion as a Cultural System,» published in 1966.1 Although Geertz, an anthropologist, was concerned in this essay with many issues that lay on the fringes of sociologists» interests, his writing is clear and incisive, the essay displays exceptional erudition, and it provides not only a concise definition of religion but also a strong epistemological and philosophical defense of the importance of religion as a topic of inquiry.

Learn about HACCP, how to define common entry points for physical contaminants and how x-ray systems help to strengthen your quality control programs

Want to know more about our Vegan Points loyalty system?

One participant, for example, is a German guy who says «I don't mind about parker points and all that stuff, I have my own ranking system with hats, I have one hat, two hats and three hats; and the three - hat wine is the best wine I make».

I am not worried about them they will drop points for sure but the way they played man city and didn't give them space but then i knew city were weak we need to work out a system when opponents play in our face other than that Liverpool will hammer them

I get your point about them being more effective in particular systems, but if you are a genius, then to a certain degree you must trascend the system and produce when your team needs it the most.

This is an incredibly difficult question to answer for a variety of reasons, most importantly because over the years our once vaunted «beautiful» style of play has become a shadow of it's former self, only to be replaced by a less than stellar «plug and play» mentality where players play out of position and adjustments / substitutions are rarely forthcoming before the 75th minute... if you look at our current players, very few would make sense in the traditional Wengerian system... at present, we don't have the personnel to move the ball quickly from deep - lying position, efficient one touch midfielders that can make the necessary through balls or the disciplined and pacey forwards to stretch defences into wide positions, without the aid of the backs coming up into the final 3rd, so that we can attack the defensive lanes in the same clinical fashion we did years ago... on this current squad, we have only 1 central defender on staf, Mustafi, who seems to have any prowess in the offensive zone or who can even pass two zones through so that we can advance play quickly out of our own end (I have seen some inklings that suggest Holding might have some offensive qualities but too early to tell)... unfortunately Mustafi has a tendency to get himself in trouble when he gets overly aggressive on the ball... from our backs out wide, we've seen pace from the likes of Bellerin and Gibbs and the spirited albeit offensively stunted play of Monreal, but none of these players possess the skill - set required in the offensive zone for the new Wenger scheme which requires deft touches, timely runs to the baseline and consistent crossing, especially when Giroud was playing and his ratio of scored goals per clear chances was relatively low (better last year though)... obviously I like Bellerin's future prospects, as you can't teach pace, but I do worry that he regressed last season, which was obvious to Wenger because there was no way he would have used Ox as the right side wing - back so often knowing that Barcelona could come calling in the off - season, if he thought otherwise... as for our midfielders, not a single one, minus the more confident Xhaka I watched played for the Swiss national team a couple years ago, who truly makes sense under the traditional Wenger model... Ramsey holds onto the ball too long, gives the ball away cheaply far too often and abandons his defensive responsibilities on a regular basis (doesn't score enough recently to justify): that being said, I've always thought he does possess a little something special, unfortunately he thinks so too... Xhaka is a little too slow to ever boss the midfield and he tends to telegraph his one true strength, his long ball play: although I must admit he did get a bit better during some points in the latter part of last season... it always made me wonder why whenever he played with Coq Wenger always seemed to play Francis in a more advanced role on the pitch... as for Coq, he is way too reckless at the wrong times and has exhibited little offensive prowess yet finds himself in and around the box far too often... let's face it Wenger was ready to throw him in the trash heap when injuries forced him to use Francis and then he had the nerve to act like this was all part of a bigger Wenger constructed plan... he like Ramsey, Xhaka and Elneny don't offer the skills necessary to satisfy the quick transitory nature of our old offensive scheme or the stout defensive mindset needed to protect the defensive zone so that our offensive players can remain aggressive in the final third... on the front end, we have Ozil, a player of immense skill but stunted by his physical demeanor that tends to offend, the fact that he's been played out of position far too many times since arriving and that the players in front of him, minus Sanchez, make little to no sense considering what he has to offer (especially Giroud); just think about the quick counter-attack offence in Real or the space and protection he receives in the German National team's midfield, where teams couldn't afford to focus too heavily on one individual... this player was a passing «specialist» long before he arrived in North London, so only an arrogant or ignorant individual would try to reinvent the wheel and / or not surround such a talent with the necessary components... in regards to Ox, Walcott and Welbeck, although they all possess serious talents I see them in large part as headless chickens who are on the injury table too much, lack the necessary first - touch and / or lack the finishing flair to warrant their inclusion in a regular starting eleven; I would say that, of the 3, Ox showed the most upside once we went to a back 3, but even he became a bit too consumed by his pending contract talks before the season ended and that concerned me a bit... if I had to choose one of those 3 players to stay on it would be Ox due to his potential as a plausible alternative to Bellerin in that wing - back position should we continue to use that formation... in Sanchez, we get one of the most committed skill players we've seen on this squad for some years but that could all change soon, if it hasn't already of course... strangely enough, even he doesn't make sense given the constructs of the original Wenger offensive model because he holds onto the ball too long and he will give the ball up a little too often in the offensive zone... a fact that is largely forgotten due to his infectious energy and the fact that the numbers he has achieved seem to justify the means... finally, and in many ways most crucially, Giroud, there is nothing about this team or the offensive system that Wenger has traditionally employed that would even suggest such a player would make sense as a starter... too slow, too inefficient and way too easily dispossessed... once again, I think he has some special skills and, at times, has showed some world - class qualities but he's lack of mobility is an albatross around the necks of our offence... so when you ask who would be our best starting 11, I don't have a clue because of the 5 or 6 players that truly deserve a place in this side, 1 just arrived, 3 aren't under contract beyond 2018 and the other was just sold to Juve... man, this is theraputic because following this team is like an addiction to heroin without the benefits

I don't see any point of being proud about the system integrated by him.

But there the dispatches leave off; not a word about whether the President is a snap shooter or takes his time and is content with one bird per flush; not a line on whether he works around between covey and woods to try the tricky overhead shots; not a word as to whether he uses the swing - through system or the pointing - out system when he pulls the trigger.

Unwinding that culture is going to take as many solutions as it can get, and I think we're at a point where we need to talk about shutting down systems that allow this sort of thing to happen on a grand scale.

It makes sense, but this is the NHL we're talking about, so there'll probably be another lockout before they seriously consider changing the point system.

In this system, the goal is to rack up as many points as possible without worrying about how terrible your upset bracket might look in a couple of weeks.