https://events.jhu.edu/form/HopInHollywood2023

My takeaways

why the LS? → conventional structures are either too inhibiting (e.g. presentations, status reports, managed discussions) or too loose/disorganized (e.g. open discussions, brainstorms) → conv. structures fail and generate frustrations → no space for new/good ideas to emerge

what are the LS? → 33 methods/tools to replace traditional meeting/facilitation structures → aim to include everyone

for whom? → everyone from C-suite to grassroots organizations

how? → minimal structure through simple constraints → DOs and DON'Ts

principles 1. Include and Unleash Everyone 2. Practice Deep Respect for People and Local Solutions 3. Build Trust As You Go 4. Learn by Failing Forward 5. Practice Self-Discovery Within a Group 6. Amplify Freedom AND Responsibility 7. Emphasize Possibilities: Believe Before You See 8. Invite Creative Destruction To Enable Innovation 9. Engage In Seriously-Playful Curiosity 10. Never Start Without Clear Purpose

https://agincourtiowa.com/2015/06/02/yawman-erbe/

Position Statement W3C Video Workshop 12/13th Dec 2007

"Architecture of a Video Web - Experience with Annodex"

• Dr Silvia Pfeiffer
• Vquence, Xiph.org and Annodex.org

Emary, K. R. W., Golubchik, T., Aley, P. K., Ariani, C. V., Angus, B., Bibi, S., Blane, B., Bonsall, D., Cicconi, P., Charlton, S., Clutterbuck, E. A., Collins, A. M., Cox, T., Darton, T. C., Dold, C., Douglas, A. D., Duncan, C. J. A., Ewer, K. J., Flaxman, A. L., … Pollard, A. J. (2021). Efficacy of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern 202012/01 (B.1.1.7): an exploratory analysis of a randomised controlled trial. The Lancet, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00628-0

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00628-0/fulltext

fully agree with this statement as motivated people motivate others and allow for a great team working ethic with everyone pulling in the same direction

Hintergrund zu Bidens Klimapolitik, internationale Erwartungen.

Bericht über die ersten Executive Orders Bidens zum Klimanotstand und über die Widerstände dagegen.

"Most Native Americans did not neatly distinguish between the natural and the supernatural. Spiritual power permeated their world and was both tangible and accessible"

This shows how much more open Natives were to the super Naturaul unlike the Europeans who were more than likely christians.

my first question: is what do they mean exactly by "kinship"?

My second question is: what does the reading mean by Chiefdoms?

"Food surpluses enabled significant population growth, and the Pacific Northwest became one of the most densely populated regions of North America"

This is significant because it shows how succesful the natives were before the Europeans showed up and spread native European diseases to Natives.

Despite being told by God that she and her husband were not allowed to eat the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Eve gave into her temptations. The idea of the "forbidden fruit" has been carried into other pieces of literature, using an apple to symbolize a character's temptation leading to downfall.

For example, in the fairy tale, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, when Snow White eats the poisoned apple, offered by the evil witch, who parallels the serpent, she falls into a death-like sleep.

Types of sources

Does the article cite sources?

Choices:

Types of sources

Does the article cite sources?

Choices:

Types of sources

Does the article cite sources?

Choices:

Types of sources

Does the article cite sources?

Choices:

Types of sources

Does the article cite sources?

Choices:

Low

At the very beginning of this Epic they are already trying to not show importance to the women, instead showing how string and how much glory the men had. Ann Marie Taylor

lesson plan

Wed Mar 29 2017 09:43:20 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Wed Mar 29 2017 09:33:50 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Wed Mar 29 2017 09:21:31 GMT-0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)

Thu Mar 23 2017 04:14:09 GMT-0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)

Thu Mar 02 2017 11:19:57 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time)

Fri Jan 27 2017 11:37:54 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time)

Mon Jan 09 2017 18:22:09 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time)

Sun Jan 08 2017 18:23:32 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time)

Sat Jan 07 2017 12:51:14 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time)

Sat Jan 07 2017 12:49:11 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time)

Sat Jan 07 2017 12:45:43 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time)

Mon Jan 02 2017 10:35:41 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time)

Sun Jan 01 2017 21:27:05 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time)

When I was reading this I related this to when I was first learning about geography. I think it was so smart for people to have a hands-on experience learning about geography feeling the ridges and the grooves in the map to represent mountains. Not only is it a great way to learn being blind, but also learning as a kid.

On the synthesis report of the aggregate effect of the INDCs, parties decided to take note of the document. After intensive discussions on the various elements of the paragraph, including the gap between the aggregate effect of the INDCs and emissions consistent with 2°C or 1.5°C, Co-Chair Reifsnyder proposed: mentioning the gap resulting from the aggregate effect of INDCs communicated by 1 October 2015; inserting figures to concretize the gap; and including language from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change on lowest-cost emission pathways. He noted a revised text would be proposed by the ADP Co-Chairs and the Secretariat.

Parties added brackets around a paragraph related to requesting the Secretariat to publish INDCs on its website.

On paragraphs related to the adoption of the agreement, parties converged on paragraph 5 on parties provisionally applying the provisions of the agreement pending entry into force.

On a body to prepare for entry into force, parties agreed that the ADP Co-Chairs and Secretariat would streamline the three options into one, representing the various proposals for the body raised by parties, including: using the ADP, changing its mandate and name, but importing all its previously agreed operational arrangements; using the SBI and/or the SBSTA; or creating a new body.

TUVALU proposed adding language stating that the new agreement was being adopted in the context of Convention Article 17 (protocols). SAUDI ARABIA, the EU and the US opposed. Co-Chair Djoghlaf suggested discussing the issue during lunchtime.

Co-Facilitator Tosi Mpanu-Mpanu (Democratic Republic of the Congo), reporting back from technology development and transfer (Article 7), noted that the African Group presented a revised option for the technology framework that was well-received and informed that views remained divergent on the global goal.

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES urged, inter alia: respecting indigenous peoples’ rights; recognizing traditional knowledge and practices; and providing direct access to climate finance.

Saying “we are far from where we need to be,” Climate Action Network (CAN), for ENVIRONMENTAL NGOs (ENGOs), called for creating five-year cycles and matching conditional INDCs with finance.

China, for Brazil, South Africa, India and China, emphasized conducting work in an open, transparent, inclusive and party-driven manner, and said that the Paris agreement should be in line with CBDR and respective capabilities. On the pre-2020 period, he stressed that developed countries must meet their commitments and define a clear roadmap to achieving the US$100 billion goal.

The Republic of Korea, for the ENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRITY GROUP, called for the adoption of an agreement that is applicable to all, includes a flexible approach to differentiation, and has common rules and a mechanism to increase ambition over time.

Angola, for the LDCs, stated that the 2°C limit is inadequate and should be strengthened to 1.5°C.

Maldives, for the ALLIANCE OF SMALL ISLAND STATES (AOSIS), called for the agreement to establish, inter alia, medium- and long-term emission reduction pathways capable of delivering less than 1.5°C of warming.

WOMEN AND GENDER urged countries to limit temperature rise to 1.5°C and avoid concepts such as net zero, carbon neutrality and offsetting.

LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND MUNICIPAL AUTHORITIES highlighted the contributions of local governments to mitigation and adaptation, while calling for a 1.5°C temperature limit.