Sentences with phrase «discussion points raised»

Again I agree with you and this goes to the discussion points raised in the Ics Shelf Instability thread.

Not exact matches

P.s., Understanding the previous discussion of the restaurant microeconomics depends on the reader understanding these points which I raised in my post on Michael Porter (his quotes are in bold and mine are in plain text as is usual):

«There never has been a substantive discussion about whether the points I'm raising are valid or not valid,» he said.

This raises a key point of discussion for the digital currency community: should Bitcoin protect its «brand,» or is reputation damage an unavoidable risk in the decentralized landscape?

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.

I'm also going to add this; in earlier comments you raised some legitimate points for discussion about how the British Mandate was apportioned, which is a huge part of the whole quagmire and the legality of it all is a huge, tangled, convoluted mess.

In this line of thought it is worth pointing out that Discussion about mission has raised a question about the very nature of the church.

This is, possibly, the most vexing issue raised by an agenda - setting book that will be the starting point of discussion and debate for years to come.

Those whose interest in the religions of Asia has been aroused to the point that they want to consider some of the comparative problems raised by the study of religions other than one's own will find thoughtful and searching discussions in two books recently published: World Religions and World Community, by Robert Lawson Slater, and The Meaning and End of Religion, by Wilfred Cantwell Smith.

While we do not think the solutions to the three points raised in the ad are as simple as those proposed, we are encouraged that prominent evangelicals are joining the discussion, acknowledging that religious people have something to say to secular decision - makers.

This symposium devoted to critical discussion of the thought of Charles Hartshorne provides an opportunity for me to press further some points I raised earlier in reviews of two of his books, The Logic of Perfection (1962) and Anselm's Discovery (1965), both of which had to do with the original ontological argument and the import of Anselm's meditations.

Decisions had to be made from time to time as to where or when services of the church would be held; the church needed to be told of the impending visit of an apostle, or of some prophet or teacher from abroad; a question has been raised as to the good faith of one of these visitors, and there must be some discussion of the point and a decision on it; a fellow Christian from another church is on a journey and needs hospitality; a member of the local congregation planning to visit a church abroad needs a letter of introduction to that church, which someone must be authorized to provide; a serious dispute about property rights or some other legal matter has arisen between two of the brothers and the church must name someone to help them settle the issue or must in some other way deal with it; a new local magistrate has begun to prosecute Christians for violating the law against unlicensed assembly, and consideration must be given to ways and means of meeting this crisis; charges have been brought against one of the members by another member, and these must be investigated and perhaps some disciplinary action taken; one of the members has died, and the church is called on for some special action in behalf of his family in the emergency; differences of opinion exist in the church on certain questions of morals or belief (such as marriage and divorce, or the resurrection), differences which local prophets and teachers are apparently unable to compose, and a letter must be written to the apostle — who will write this letter and what exactly will it say?

Thanks, Tracy, good point, although I think Lori's discussion of online forums and tweetups speaks to the issue you raise.

The way in which comedy was used being the primary area of the discussion for the panel with Paxton raising the point that whilst the plays written were usually comical they held a mirror up the patriarchal narrative of the era.

Other points raised included Josh Marshall's mention of the power of distributed researchers to gather and filter information quickly (shades of the Dan Rather memo - explosion from» 04) and a brief discussion by Berman of the Obama MySpace profile flap and the inherent problems that arise when a campaign doesn't control a vital resource.

Raising the minimum wage has been a hotly debated issue in the state in the past and Valesky says that's the point, putting this discussion on the Senate floor.

Onondaga County Legislator Kevin Holmquist, R - Manlius, makes a point during a Ways and Means Committee discussion about giving raises to elected officials.

It's an important point, because the apparent rift over the Inner Harbor development project has raised questions about the relations between the two offices, which will be critical to the future of Central New York — public discussions about different possible regional government arrangements are on the horizon, via the upcoming Consensus report and the fact that a plan to consider alternative governing structures was embedded in the recent $ 500 million aid package from the state.

Johanna Duncan - Poitier, senior vice chancellor for community colleges and the education pipeline for the State University of New York, administratively based in Albany, reiterated a point that is commonly raised in discussions about the STEM workforce: Jobs are available, but job - seekers largely don't have the skills needed to fill them.

If the point of Anonymous was to raise an alternative explanation for the mind behind William Shakespeare's work and begin a frank and honest discussion on the subject, it fails.

Most appropriate for older teens and their parents, the film raises many worthwhile discussion points.

What we propose in the International Campaign aims to create an international movement of thought, discussion, reflection, and action led by civil society, in order to provide contents, raise awareness, define priorities and lines of action, good practices, and find solutions to those points.

Stay tuned: Professor Geoff Masters» next Teacher column - Is there an alternative way to think about schooling (to be published 18 April)- is a detailed discussion of the points he raises in this podcast.

The discussion, which in many ways served as jumping off point for the two - day Alumni of Color Conference, raised as many questions as it answered for long standing problems that do not yield themselves to quick solutions.

While these are merely ideas and suggestions at this point (I have yet to research them in the field), I think this list raises questions and hopefully stimulates discussion.

For example, during a whole class discussion, students should be expected to bounce ideas off of their peers» comments, paraphrase and extend the conversation, and, through inquiry, sharpen and deepen the points being raised — all without the teacher serving as the intermediary.

It could be used as a «starting» point for further discussion of the issues raised.

In classroom discussions, compliant learners typically restrict themselves to answering the question the teacher asked, whereas engaged learners tend to raise additional questions, delve more deeply into thinking, or offer another point of view.

In his paper, Guskey raises two points that I think are pertinent to this discussion:

The issue wasn't even raised to the local Board of Education until ten days later and at that point it was referred to a sub-committee for discussion.

We've enabled the «Discussions» feature so if you have ideas and thoughts about the site, please don't hesitate to raise the point.

I wanted to make a point I don't see being raised in these types of discussions: the bargain - basement pricing that Americans are now seeing in the Amazon.com store for tradpub heavy hitters is * not * being seen in at least some other territories.

The idea do the discussion section is to discuss the points raised.

When the question regarding females in journalism was raised it sparked up a discussion on the whole «Gamersgate» issue, but the female panelists were quick to reinforce their point of «we need females in gaming journalism and PLEASE do not give up on your passion».

I just don't see how a proper discussion of the points you have raised would not have to inevitably devolve into a political discussion at some point if your post was to be properly explored.

A point Crichton raises that, in my opinion, merits serious discussion is the cost / benefits analysis of environmnental regulation, combined with the principle of uncertainty relating to unintended consequences.

Dear all, besides all the discussion there are some real points raised here above that might give basis for a commentary.

This is a fascinating discussion - though it raises more questions than answers - which is, I suppose, the point.

So, thank you for your contributions to some other discussion, wrong though every point you raised was.

She has raised an issue for discussion, with a couple of external perspectives as a starting point, and a brief and restrained comment of her own.

Taking a neutral stance at this point on work from «NIPCC» (Fred Singer et al.), suggesting that this kind of effort «competes» with the work of several of the world's climate scientists and a large number of multidisciplinary specialists contributing to IPCC reports combined with the additional scientists and many others who raise real questions that result from reading, reviewing, evaluating and evolving the information in both IPCC summaries and domestic science and discussion of the science, is just not credible, in my humble opinion.

Taking a neutral stance at this point on rehashed work from «NIPCC» (Fred Singer and friends), well known for serial, serious errors in overall interpretation, analysis and communication of the science and transparent but largely unexamined ideological bias at play in their playground «reports» — never mind suggesting that this kind of effort «competes» with the work of the world's climate scientists and the 2,500 multidisciplinary specialists contributing to IPCC reports combined with the tens of thousands of additional scientists and many others who raise real questions that result from reading, reviewing, evaluating and evolving the information in both IPCC summaries and domestic science and discussion of the science, knowledgeably and in good faith and with open identification of the nature of the social and political issues — is just not credible.

During the discussion of discounting and the Stern Review, I got an email raising a point that I had already been worrying about.

Recent comments here and in other threads raise questions about the choices Judith Curry makes in citing claims of a «contrarian» nature as the starting point for some discussions.

In regards to your hypothetical North Korean example, (which has no relationship or similarity to the AR5 privacy agreement BTW), you are using the common «lessor evil to prevent a greater evil» example, which is of course a common philosophical point of discussion, and often even raised in movies and literature.

The report will also include exposition of a very telling mistake in their discussion of empirical AR1 in section 3, along with a review of points previously raised concerning this section.

This bucket / engine - intake discussion or controversy is becoming very intriguing, but I'd like to raise a point that worries me a bit.

But the «right to be forgotten» discussion raises a point that some have made about formal discipline histories.

Finally — and without taking law - related connections to the breaking point — my family had a discussion on the bus ride home to Chicago on building our own version of the Farnsworth House, thereby raising the question of copyright in architectural plans: to what extent can a person use someone else's architectural plans (i.e., the plans Mies used for the Farnsworth House) to create their own three - dimensional structure?

The report — and the questions it raises — form a starting point for discussions and further consultations with...