Sentences with phrase «there much discussion»

When the new game started to be developed, was there much discussion of the trends in how women are usually made appealing in games right now?

Nor is there much discussion about how the teams will assess the results.

Not exact matches

The gurus at Stanford preached against too much passive listening; therefore, there are frequent opportunities for discussion in small groups and the occasional appearance by Gino Ramos, Salesforce's resident dance instructor.

Again in my own discussions, there isn't a fascination with Twitter feeds as much as there once was.

We spend hours doing that without realizing there could be a much better way to communicate with the help of A.I. routines, more focused discussions, online chat, and other systems designed to help us communicate more and sift less.

There's been much discussion about delegates trying to dump Trump by altering the party's rules.

As Richard Settersten, author of Not Quite Adults: Why 20 - Somethings Are Choosing a Slower Path to Adulthood, and Why It's Good for Everyone, has said: «the media focuses so much on coddled kids, but there's a huge, invisible class of young people that's just not part of our public discussion and who are really in dire straits.»

There are no vacuums left in today's world of social media, which means that, if you're not talking about your products and driving the discussion as much as possible, someone else will be.

There has been much discussion about the Riot's insider stock sales and long - term viability, which is well - warranted.

There is much discussion of the merits and implications of possible candidates for the job.

There should be a public discussion about how much safety we'd be willing to sacrifice for the convenience.

Senator Carignan: There is much discussion about short - term prognosis.

With the GDPR's implementation date looming, there has been much discussion about whether the regulation requires a «right to an explanation» from machine learning models.

«But I believe there's something missing from most of the discussion: You should spend just as much time thinking about how to bring in extra money as you do thinking of ways to save what you already have.

«There are certainly things that are illegal content, so that is more of an area where talking about regulations could make sense, but so much of what comes up in general discussion about this is out of reach of government action from the get - go.»

But there's much discussion — and quite a bit of bitterness — about which brews are truly deserving of the label.

There are a lot of provisions within the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), much of which isn't relevant to this discussion.

This includes a discussion about what your goals are, when you want to reach them and how much risk you're comfortable taking to get there.

But at the same time that's all secondarily affecting the millennial generation as well so there's not much discussion in that regard, you know how repressed interest rates have negatively affected the millennial generation.

One of the reasons is that there is so much bad news priced into the euro, clearly you may want to wait out what's happening with the discussions with Greece on how that is playing out.

There has also been much discussion about the buyer's journey — including from me — on how we have to map to the buyer's journey as they go through these buying stages and how we track via the sales funnel.

But there's another important possibility which doesn't get much discussion.

And then, just to clarify, I know this was a big discussion topic kind of intra-quarter, but which of your non-U.S. countries have the most significant amount of pricing that are done in dollars, and has there been any material amount of discounting or extra competitive activity in these countries just given how much other currencies have depreciated versus the dollar in recent months?

There is much that could be said about this, but I will stick with one thing, based on discussion at about the 2 minute mark: When atheists insist that atheism does not drive behavior, and then then campaign on behalf of atheism, ridicule religion and religious believers in the name of atheism, seek to change laws in favor of their atheistic positions, recommend the extermination of religion, and practice falsehoods like Dawkins's in support of atheism, they prove that their atheism drives their behavior and that their premise is false, disingenuous, and (as far as I can tell) useless for anything but giving atheism rhetorical cover from being implicated in atheists» atrocities.

Many have pointed out the hypocrisy of this and that's why there is so much heated discussion.

When in the 1970s there began to be much discussion about «mediating structures» and voluntarism, when Ronald Reagan urged us to rely on government less and on ourselves more, when George Bush talked about a «thousand points of light,» those of a statist mind - set groused that it was all a scheme to cut back on government social services.

There is so much here that needs discussion and exploration.

The English word «Church», like many other terms in theology, has picked up so much baggage and comes from such questionable origins that it is no longer helpful in discussions like these, but there are few handy alternatives.

In recent months there has been much discussion as to what the first Christians believed about marriage and the discipline of the sacraments.

I was just doing this as part of my trilogy; it started with Buddha and then Jesus, and now it turns out serendipitously that the timing is appropriate because there is so much discussion about Islam in the world.

Since there was so much controversy about the alleged affiliation of Obama with a hater of America «Jeremiah Wright», there needs to be a platform discussion about the beliefs of Romney.

There are plenty of discussions about how much you should give, where exactly you should give and what that looks like.

I don't understand why there is so much discussion regarding the Bible and what Obama believes or doesn't believe, there is no mention of his opponent's complete disregard of the King James Bible.

Despite the rhetoric of democracy there is a lack of transparency m discussions of officials with the IMF / WB authorities and their decisions regarding conditionalities often imposed on the debtor countries without clear exposure even to Parliament and its select committees, much less to the general public affected by them.

In the debate over abortion there has been much discussion surrounding «the seamless garment» as a metaphor for the so - called «life issues.»

There has been much discussion whether the sociologist of religion is right in viewing his material from a special point of view and handling it according to a special method, or whether he has a more or less well - circumscribed field which he can call his own.

There has subsequently been much discussion about the nature of mystical or religious experience and many scholars would argue that there are varieties of spiritual experiThere has subsequently been much discussion about the nature of mystical or religious experience and many scholars would argue that there are varieties of spiritual experithere are varieties of spiritual experience.

There is much two - way speech in the Gospels: dialogue in the forms of question and answer, discussion, and story and comment.

It is good this issue is coming out because it is something that needs to be discussed but there's so much yelling and arguing on both sides I'm afraid you would get as much discussion from a group of first graders.

How many Christians, I wonder, are aware that in the Book of Job there is much discussion about God and about human suffering and wickedness but not a whisper about heaven or hell, or anything of the kind?

Though I like to delve in and look up facts, view commentaries, decipher vocabulary, etc., I find sometimes that there is too much «theological» discussion rather than being open to spiritual and carnal advice.

There is much that process thought can contribute to the contemporary ethical discussion on character and virtue.

There is much debate about exactly where in John this particular story should have been ascribed, as it did not show up until the 5th century, but rarely any discussion about it's legitimacy.

There has been much debate and discussion of that question — not to mention controversy surrounding global engagement of Muslims.

It is my view, however, that abandoning the discussion of what a substance is and of whether there is anything that fits this requirement has not removed substance thinking from a dominant role in academia as well as in much of our society.

As the confetti settles from the Democratic and Republican Conventions, there will be much discussion... As the confetti settles from the Democratic and Republican Conventions, there will be much discussion...

There is very much more discussion between Protestant and Catholic thinkers on a theological level in Europe than there is in this couThere is very much more discussion between Protestant and Catholic thinkers on a theological level in Europe than there is in this couthere is in this country.

The Institutional Church Finally, we know that today very often there is much discussion of the outward institution of the Church and its relation to its real inner nature.

And I freely admit I sometimes use too many extraneous, space - consuming, overly - descriptive, qualifying, words or sentences written quickly and in a stream - of - conscientiousness, run - on sort of fashion with occasional typos mostly due to fatigue of being up way too late (which also explains this post in general) after a long day of political discussion which refreshingly had little religious content though of course there is often much overlap between the two but posting is barely a hobby but more of an occasional passtime so now i wonder if what I write could be considered abuse as I've can't really recall seeing much if any sorrt of «text filibustering» not that this is exactly filibustering more a spontaneous text performance response joke and meant in jest to be absurdly long and useless so of course i hope you appreciate the spirit.

I do not overlook the fact that there has been much discussion in the intervening years — the shaking of the foundations of the analytic - synthetic distinction, for example — which surely does not leave the situation unchanged.