So very few organizations make an effort to address physician burnout proactively … it is an industry wide blind spot. We are all so busy putting out the daily fires of patient care and ceaseless organizational change that doing something for the people in the system never makes it onto your punch list.
What if you have a Physician Wellness Committee?
You are not out of the woods by any means. Your organization is one of the 10% who are making an attempt to address physician burnout proactively. You are one of the lucky ones.
And your Physician Wellness Committee will fail if you don't understand these 7 critical errors I see organizations make over and over again.
Any attempt to address physician burnout without CEO, CMO and COO support will fail. Without their obvious verbal and budgetary support of your burnout prevention efforts - they are just humoring you.
They will give lip service to letting the most concerned of you get together for a monthly meeting ... and yet when it comes time to write a check for a prevention project ... what looked like support quickly, vanishes.
This is a consequence of a leadership capitulation at the highest level. The leaders are sick and tired of physician's whining and have given up on the possibility of things being different. They will let you meet as much as you want as long as it doesn't cost money. They have zero faith that your Wellness Committee will make any meaningful changes.
This administration stance that is hostile to physician wellbeing (whether they will cop to it or not) is present at approaching 90% of organizations in my experience.
Make sure you have leadership support at the highest level ... or you are doomed to an ineffective insurgency against an opposition that has the high ground.
Do NOT name your committee the "Physician Wellness Committee". Here's why.
Wellness is a completely foreign concept to physicians. We are taught and conditioned to diagnose and treat disease. If you seat a "Wellness Committee", the only time your doctors will ever use the word "wellness" in their work week is when they are saying the actual name of the committee.
This simple name change can create focus and momentum from the start.
Taking time and energy to research best practices is a complete waste of time.
When you do find a group that is getting traction against physician burnout, you will quickly find their program is unique. When you have seen one burnout prevention program ... you have seen one.
In today's healthcare industry, most groups are a conglomeration of formerly independent provider organizations - spread out over a wide geographic area - each with their own history, culture, specialty makeup and, until recently, their own individual compensation formulas.
You must focus your working group on addressing your unique issues from the start. You can very easily waste 12 – 18 months and all of your budget on this search for someone else's solution you can simply mimeograph when that is magical thinking at its finest.
This is a complete waste of time unless you FIRST create a feedback loop with your front line providers.
It is that simple. This urge to come up with the right answer is a classic piece of physician programming. Do not fall victim to it.
When I say "ask your people what they need" I am NOT talking about the typical 140 item physician satisfaction surveys that cost $1M and still yield no actionable answers. These abominations actually make burnout and stress levels worse and send the message, "we would rather spend money on surveys than on helping you out."
Think about it ... asking a busy doc to fill out a 140 item physician engagement survey ... what message does that send? Really? 140 items for gosh sakes and I know I will never hear about the results again.
Your burnout prevention working group can send a seven item survey that will give you actionable results in days.
1) What is your level of satisfaction with your practice here at MegaHealthCorp - on a 1 - 10 scale?
2) What is the #1 source of stress in your work day?
3) What is the #2 source of stress in your work day?
4) What is the #3 source of stress in your work day?
5) How would you describe the culture around here in one sentence?
6) What would you like that culture to be?
Most burnout prevention working groups are given no protected time, no pay, no administrative support and no budget. This is another way to know your C-suite is just humoring you rather than actually caring about your health and happiness.
- administrative support for the working group including meeting facilitators, project managers and administrative assistant support.
doctors on the working group.
An enlightened CFO should be your biggest supporter here. Remember when we lower stress and burnout levels we increase patient satisfaction and quality and decrease malpractice risk and turnover. That combination should raise the eyebrows of any intelligent CFO.
There is a MASSIVE HOLE in the education of all the people in your organization who touch patients in the course of their work day.
Your doctors and staff learned NOTHING about stress, stress management and burnout prevention in their training. Doctors, NP's, PA's, nurses, MA's, reception, administrators ... everyone is at risk.
Burnout is the giant sucking sound of this hole in our education.
SO the first responsibility of the Burnout Prevention Working Group is to coordinate a system wide education program.
This is the responsibility of the employer and a first step for the burnout prevention working group because even now these topics are not being covered in healthcare training programs.
Without basic burnout prevention training you have no foundation for additional working group initiatives.
ii) Our self help manual: "Stop Physician Burnout"
Have you ever seen a new process come down from administration that made no sense at all? From your position in the front lines it is clear they didn't ask a doctor about this half baked idea along the way. I know you have experienced this.
And your suspicions are absolutely correct. This process WAS designed in a physician leadership vacuum. At no point along the way was a physician given the chance to influence the design of this process. Your burnout prevention working group is a natural source of this input for the organization.
One of the main causes of physician burnout is the stress of the systems in which we see patients. There are three systems working in parallel in most practice situations.
If your physicians do not have the ability to give input as these systems are designed, you are putting your people under more stress than is necessary.
Use our four-part Quadruple Aim Blueprint Strategy to launch your Burnout Prevention Working Group with immediate impact.
What wellness committee successes and failures have you seen.


Mid-hill highway (मध्य पहाडी लोकमार्ग / Madhya Pahadi Lokmarga) is a under-construction highway in the hilly regions of Nepal which will run all the way from Chiyabhanjyang (Panchathar) in the east to Jhulaghat (Baitadi) in the far-west for about 1,765 kms. This highway will run somehow parallel to the present East-West Highway (1,024 km) which runs through plain area. About 1,000 kms road of Mid-hill hw is already in existence in different names whereas above 750 kms is new construction for which all tracks have been opened already.
This highway will connect 24 hilly districts and 215 villages of the country. Districts that will be connected by this highway are: Panchthar, Terathum, Dhankuta, Bhojpur, Khotang, Okhaldhung, Udayapur, Sindhuli, Kabhrepalchok, Sindhupalchok, Nuwakot, Dhading, Gorkha, Lamjung, Kaski, Parbat, Baglung, Rukum, Jajarkot, Dailekh, Achham, Doti, Dadeldhura & Baitadi. Central point of this highway will be Pati bhanjyang, Nuwakot.
It is one of the 21 nationally prioritized projects of the government of Nepal. The government is planning to establish 10 model cities along the mid- hill highway. Purposed 10 cities to set up model towns are Phidim (Panchthar), Basantapur (Terhathum), Khurkot (Sindhuli), Baireni Galchhi (Dhading), Dumre (Tanahun), Burtibang (Baglung), Chaurjahari (Rukum), Rakam (Dailekh), Sanfebagar (Achham) and Patan (Baitadi). These purposed model cities are expected to reduce the current migration from hilly region to Terai in search of food, Education, Health and other basic needs.
Kathmandu Terai Fast Track (काठमाडौँ तराई द्रुत मार्ग) is a Expressway under construction which joins national capital city Kathmandu to terai flatlands of Nepal within an hour. This project is categorized as a national pride project (राष्ट्र गौरव आयोजना) and expected to complete in 2022.
The 76.4 km long road will join Khokana suburb of Lilitpur to Nijgadh, Bara in State no 2 Madhesh. There will be a 1.5 KM long tunnel (in Thingan, Makwanpur), 99 bridges and 6 overhead bridges along the way. The road will be 23 meter wide in hill area and 25 meter wide in the plains.
2009 Nov 9: Nepal Army started opening track for fast track.
2013 Mar 10: Nepal army completed the opening of track and handed over to the gov.
2015 Mar 13: Govt decided to sign agreement to indian company ILFS to make DPR of fast track.
2015 Jul 31: ILFS made DPR according to which travel time will be under an hour.
2016 Nov 20: KP Oli cabinet cancelled the fast track construction deal with Indian company Infrastructure Leasing and Financial Services Ltd (ILFS). Company DPR had estimated price US $1,117 million for the project.
2016 Dec 22: cabinet formed a panel to study and consult about fast track construction.
2017 Feb 20: 7 member panel formed to study fast track submitted its report to gov, urging it to run the project on its own investment.
2017 May 4: Prachand Govt decided to give responsibility to construct fast track to Nepal Army.
2017 May 28: PM Prachanda laid foundation of fast track. It is expected to be constructed in 4 years.
2017 June 13: Nepal Army begin field assessment.
2017 June 22: Deuba cabinet endorsed the work procedure of fast track.
2017 Aug 11: govt officially handed over the fast track project to Nepal Army.
2017 Sep 20: Nepal Army said it will amend the DPR to reduce the height of bridges.
2017 Dec 13: Nepal army started tree cutting in Nijgadh sector for fast track.
2018 Jan 1: Army said fast tack is expedited.
2018 Jan 16: Nepal army announced to make their own DPR for fast track.
The Kerung Rasuwagadi border was used for mutual transaction between Nepal and Tibet (China) for hundreds of years. But it was formally opened for bilateral trade in 2014 Dec as the alternative to the Tatopani border. When 2015 earthquake fully blocked Tatopani border, Kerung border emerged as the main trading point. In 2017 Aug 30, Keyrung border declared as the international border allowing citizens from third countries to cross as well.
The Kathmandu-Kerung route can be divided into two segments: Kathmandu to Betrawoti, and Betrawoti to Kerung.
There are three roads available for Kathmandu-Betrawoti segment.
China completed Lhasa-Shigatse railway in 2014 Aug. Shigatse (Xigazê) is the nearest large Chinese city from Nepal. Shigatse-Kerung rail line in Chinese side is under construction and expected to complete by 2022.
2018 Jun 21: Nepal & China agreed to built Kerung-Kathmandu rail line in around 7 years during PM Oli's visit to China.


text:
Scientific Presentations
BPDCN
IR Style Guide
Investor & Media
Stemline Therapeutics, Inc. is a commercial-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on the development and commercialization of novel oncology therapeutics. ELZONRIS (tagraxofusp), a targeted therapy directed to CD123, is FDA-approved and commercially available in the U.S. for the treatment of adult and pediatric patients, two years and older, with blastic plasmacytoid dendritic cell neoplasm (BPDCN). In Europe, a marketing authorization application (MAA) is under review by the European Medicines Agency (EMA). ELZONRIS is also being evaluated in clinical trials in additional indications including chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML), myelofibrosis (MF) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Additional pipeline candidates include: felezonexor (SL-801) (XPO1 inhibitor; Phase 1 in advanced solid tumor patients ongoing), SL-1001 (novel RET kinase inhibitor, IND-enabling studies ongoing), SL-701 (immunotherapeutic; Phase 2 in glioblastoma patients completed), and SL-901 (novel kinase inhibitor; prior abbreviated European Phase 1, IND-enabling studies ongoing).
Corporate Presentation - March 2020
More information is coming soon.
© 2021 – Stemline Therapeutics, Inc. All rights reserved | Privacy & Terms of Use

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Q: Azure enabling content trust will impact exisitng images in registry? We are planning to enable content trust in Azure Content Registry so that we can push the signed images to repo for the consumers to use. But I have few doubts?

*

*Once I enable content trust, can the users still able to pull the existing images?

*Once I enable content trust, can I push both signed and unsigned images to the registry?

Can anyone advise on this?
Thanks

A: If you enable Content Trust in Azure Container Registry, the repository could have both signed and unsigned image.
From the docs:

Content trust works with the tags in a repository. Image repositories can contain images with both signed and unsigned tags. For example, you might sign only the myimage:stable and myimage:latest images, but not myimage:dev.

One important point is that only user with the AcrImageSigner role can push signed image to the registry.

Only the users or systems you've granted permission can push trusted images to your registry. To grant trusted image push permission to a user (or a system using a service principal), grant their Azure Active Directory identities the AcrImageSigner role. This is in addition to the AcrPush (or equivalent) role required for pushing images to the registry.

And for the ability to pull untrusted image, if the client activate the content trust on Docker, he could only pull trusted image. But, if he still want an untrusted image, we could add --disable-content-trust to the pull command.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Sad to be where we are. Let's gather locally
Transylvania Co. Indivisible
Rev. Dr. Barber
Facebook Fundraiser For Separated Immigrant Families Raises $12 Million In 5 Days
Posted by David Williams | Jun 21, 2018 | Equality, Immigration/Deportation, Resistance
U.S. Border Patrol agents arrive to detain a group of Central American asylum seekers near the U.S.-Mexico border in McAllen, Texas earlier this month.
TALIA WIENER NPR June 20, 20183:05 PM ET
Charlotte and Dave Willner started a Facebook fundraiser, titled "Reunite an immigrant parent with their child," after they saw a viral photo of a 2-year-old Honduran girl looking up and crying as her mother was searched by a Border Patrol agent in southern Texas. They created the page on Saturday, June 16, hoping to raise $1,500. As of Wednesday, more than 300,000 donors have raised more than $12 million. The page is bringing in more than $10,000 a minute, according to organizers.
The Willners say they were motivated to start the fundraiser because the photo reminded them of their own 2-year-old daughter.
"This is the exact face she makes when she's terrified," wrote Charlotte Willner in a Facebook post June 15.
The money will be go to the Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services (RAICES) — a large immigration legal services non-profit organization in Texas. In addition to $12 million on Facebook, the organization has raised at least an additional $4.5 million through its own website. The group's entire budget in recent years has been around around $7 million.
Specifically, the money will be divided between two projects: The Legal Representation, Advocacy, and Education (LEAF) for Universal Representation for Unaccompanied Children and the Family Reunification and Bond Fund: Free our Families. The group says the projects, created around early June, serve the parents of separated families and provide representation for unaccompanied minors after they are released from custody.
President Trump signed an order Wednesday to end family separations at the border, and the House is preparing to vote on immigration legislation. Both bills include language to end the controversial policy.
RAICES says even if the administration's family separation policy ends, the money will still go toward legal representation for immigrant families and addressing the "endless amount of need for families to be served and kept together." The Willmers plan to end the fundraiser this Saturday.
RAICES was chosen as the recipient of the funds because the couple was inspired by the organization's work, says Malorie Lucich, a friend of the Willners helping to coordinate the fundraiser.
"Before anything else happens, families need to be reunited," Lucich wrote in an email Wednesday. "We are truly impressed with their organization, planning and compassion for the people they work with every day."
RAICES Director of Education and Outreach Jennifer Hixon says the donations will enable RAICES to do the work they have dreamed of doing.
"Working in this field for the last year and a half has been really hard," said Hixon. "This is a resounding statement by thousands of people around the country that it's not okay what's going on at the border and that they want to join us in fighting back."
The organization says it's considering partnering with other organizations to spread the funds out and "get the money where it needs to go."
The Trump administration has maintained that it is following immigration law and it is up to Congress to solve the family separation issue.
As NPR has reported, the reunification isn't quite as simple as the title of the fundraiser might imply. Detained parents face a court hearing where the fact that they have children may not be considered or even mentioned.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement says it will "make every effort to reunite the child with the parent once the parent's immigration case has been adjudicated." A hotline has also been set up to help parents and children find each other.
"ICE and [the Office of Refugee Resettlement] will work together to locate separated children, verify the parent/child relationship, and set up regular communication and removal coordination, if necessary," ICE said in a statement to NPR.
RAICES has been receiving referrals from people prosecuted through the federal criminal court system and helping to connect them with their children, but has also struggled to further assist those in need. Hixon says the organization is shocked by the fundraiser and that the money will allow the projects to finally move forward.
"What this enables us to do is not just identify [immigrant families], but to move to the next step and actually support them," said Hixon. "We really want to make sure that people get access to counsel … It really doesn't get less ridiculous than the idea that a 4-year-old is going to go to court and represent themselves without an attorney."
The Facebook page for the fundraiser is filled with words of encouragement and offers of help. Jacob Hill, 20, decided to make a donation after hearing about the fundraiser on a podcast.
"For me, the way that I've processed this news has proceeded in stages," said Hill. "From wanting to cry when you see the images of these kids to rage to wanting to try to do something about it. This is such an easy way to feel like you're making a contribution."
Both former Facebook employees, (Charlotte is now employed by Pinterest and Dave by Airbnb), the couple's efforts garnered the attention of Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg who both made donations, according to Politico. The fundraiser is also being matched up to $360,000 by a number of private donors according to the Facebook page.
"Just as the administration is doubling down on horrible, harmful policies, we need to double down on doing big things to fight back," said Hixon. "This is our answer to the administration continuing to target immigrants in our community and our immigrant families."
Talia Wiener is an intern on NPR's National Desk.
PreviousBorder ranchers, in a world without a wall
NextLower Rio Grande Valley Sierra Club Organizer- Please Help Us Reunify Families
The Civil Rights movement of the 60's and 70's provided David with his introduction to the pacific resistance and social activism of the Mahatma Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King. Understandings and beliefs now long dormant and his commitment to those teachings guide his renewed activism with Transylvania Indivisible today. His determination to provide his son and grandson with a chance to live the American Dream drive his ongoing passion for change.
Naomi Klein: The Worst Is Yet to Come with Trump, So We Must Be Ready for Shock Politics
NC NAACP threatens to sue and urges Apple and Amazon to stay away from NC over 'voter ID' bill and Charter school law
So Many Issues, Hard to Know Where to Put Your Energies – Does Rev. Dr. Barber and Company Have the Answer?
Be Right There email list sign-up
August 20 | "For the People" Forum | Brevard
Medicaid expansion is at the heart of the budget fight. Here's what it means for NC.
NC State Senate Budget Eschews Medicaid Expansion
Trump again attacks press as 'Enemy of the People', suggests public may 'demand' he not leave office
2018 Mid-Term Candidates (19)
Davis Whitfield-Cargile (1)
Norm Bossert (3)
Phillip Price (5)
Sam Edney (4)
Be the Paris Agreement (42)
Citizen's Climate Lobby (10)
Community Compost Drop-off Location (4)
Moving to Conservers (54)
NC Conservation Network (3)
Pisgah (7)
Sierra Club News (19)
Equality (156)
DACA (26)
Prison Reform (4)
Tax Reform (33)
Gerrymandering (100)
Immigration/Deportation (66)
Mueller Russian Investigation (31)
NAACP News (46)
North Carolina General Assembly (74)
Op-Ed (152)
Our Elected Representatives (249)
Brevard City Government (8)
Chuck Edwards (18)
Cody Henson (27)
Mark Meadows (73)
President Trump (71)
Richard Burr (59)
Rosman City Government (3)
Thom Tillis (63)
Transylvania County Government (5)
Resistance (203)
Poor People Campaign (7)
Progressive Organized Women (2)
Rev. Dr. Barber (21)
Transylvania Indivisible (105)
Take Action! (143)
The Gift of Time (7)
Transylvania County Community (29)
Transylvania County Community Building (2)
Transylvania County Government (11)
Use Food Scraps (15)
Volunteer Opportunity (10)
Voting and Elections (162)
What we are reading (15)
Subscribe to NC General Assembly news
Receive emails from the NC General Assembly on legislative actions by subscribing here: http://www.ncleg.net/calendars/calendars.html#Subscribe
US Most Viewed Bills
Most-Viewed Bills - Week of January 12, 2020
US House Activity Excerpt
US Senate Activity Excerpt
NAACP's Transylvania Together Podcast
The Opposite of Addiction, with Jim Hardy
Meals on Wheels of Brevard, NC, with Board Member Sasha Jones
The Community Side of Recidivism - Meet Peter McKinney
Meet Mark Burrows, Director of Transylvania County Planning and Community Development
Meet Nicola Karesh, a Writer, Poet, Community Activist and a Playful Spirit
Meet Kyle Tinsley, Graduate of Brevard High School and former leader of the Acceptance Club
Meet Bobby Jones of Cedar Mountain, NC. His grandfather was Solomon Jones of Solomon Jones Road, the road to Pretty Place.
Meet the founder of Transylvania Indivisible. David Williams.
How the Affordable Care Act (ACA) helped Cedar Mountain, NC get a new cafe
Meet Dal Davis, a student at Brevard College.
John Wiseman
kdavare
Kim Coram
Kimberly Jo Coram
Maureen Copelof
Susan Sunflower
Join us for a gathering tomorrow to support justice and equality at the gazebo on Main Street at 5 pm in Brevard
National School Walkout in Brevard and other happenings
Let's talk about curbside composting in Brevard
Do you want to start a co-op in Brevard? NAACP releases their newest podcast. Meet Sasha Jones!
Our pop-up coffeehouse is today. We are creating a place for peace, love, and unity in downtown Brevard. Please join us.
Fight the Tax Bill Rally! Asheville at Vance Monument - Monday at 5 pm
Pop-up coffeehouse December 10 downtown Brevard & Contact Senators about the tax bill.
Reach out and touch somebodies hand.
While we wait for Cody Henson to reschedule his Town Hall, meet his opponent. And take our 10-second survey, please.


text:
Justia › US Law › Case Law › California Case Law › Cal. App. 2d › Volume 106 › Clark v. Bradley
Clark v. Bradley
[Civ. No. 14693. First Dist., Div. One. Sept. 17, 1951.]
ANNA MAE CLARK, Appellant, v. OSCAR A. BRADLEY, Respondent.
David H. Adams for Appellant.
Jensen, Cassin, Overson, Zavlaris & Rendler for Respondent.
BRAY, J.
After a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant moved for a new trial, filing certain affidavits. Plaintiff purports to appeal from an order denying her motion to strike one of those affidavits. The court granted the motion for new trial. Plaintiff appeals. [106 Cal. App. 2d 539]
Question Presented
(1) Was the admission in evidence without objection of the back portion of a certain card error which justified the court in granting a new trial? (2) Was the affidavit of the trial juror to impeach her verdict or to support it?
Pursuant to section 196(a) of the Civil Code, plaintiff, mother of a minor illegitimate child, brought this action to require defendant, the putative father, to help support and educate the child. Defendant denied paternity. A jury found defendant to be the father. A judgment for its support was entered against defendant. Thereafter defendant moved for a new trial on all statutory grounds. Plaintiff moved to strike from the record the affidavit of certain trial jurors. The court struck out the affidavits of two of the jurors but refused to strike that of juror Leone, on the ground that it was not in impeachment, but in support, of her verdict. It granted the new trial solely on the ground of error in the admission in evidence of certain material on the back of a certain card.
1. Was There Error in the Admission of Evidence?
Evidence.
A brief statement of the evidence is necessary as background for consideration of the claimed error. Plaintiff's testimony follows. She, an unmarried woman, became acquainted with defendant in 1936. In 1939 she was employed as housekeeper in the home of defendant, his wife and small children. A part of her duties was to take care of the daughter, Marjorie. She lived in the Bradley home in a room which had an outside entrance. In the early part of 1941 she and Bradley commenced having intimate relations, which continued for several years. In May, 1942, she went to work for the draft board, left the Bradley home and took a room in a house for college girls. Defendant proposed marriage to her in June, 1942. He gave her a key to his place of business and she gave him a key to her boarding house. He visited her at her room there. In September, 1943, she went to Los Angeles, returning to San Jose on October 4th. The week she returned she had intercourse with defendant on Monday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday. During the months prior to her trip to Los Angeles she had frequent intercourse with defendant. In the latter part of October or early [106 Cal. App. 2d 540] part of November she discovered that she was pregnant. She told defendant about it. He told her not to do anything, that he would marry her and take her away. She now saw him more often than before. On April 15, 1944, she left San Jose for her home in Missouri. Defendant packed her bags and took her to the station. He said he would come to see her. The child was born June 26, 1944. Plaintiff, the child and defendant stood together before the jury for its observation of them. Plaintiff testified that for Christmas, 1942, defendant gave her a bracelet and heart with the initial "B" engraved on the heart and that the following Valentine's Day he gave her a second heart for it. Defendant's wife and son testified that these were gifts given by Mrs. Bradley at Marjorie's suggestion and that there was no "B" on the heart when given.
Plaintiff offered in evidence certain letters which she claimed were sent her by defendant. They were rather sticky love letters and definitely indicate intimacy between the parties. Defendant denied that he had written them. Plaintiff's handwriting expert testified they were in defendant's handwriting, while defendant's expert said they were not. Plaintiff testified that while she was in Missouri she wrote defendant a letter. Defendant admits receiving a letter from her. They disagree as to its contents. Defendant said it had been destroyed. Plaintiff testified it started out "Hello Honey" and that it contained an inquiry as to whether he was waiting until his wife finished school before coming to her. "I know that we both have done wrong, but the only right thing now for us to do is to take care of our child. I have been to the doctor and he states that the baby will be born either the 4th or the 7th of July." Defendant testified that the letter was addressed "Dear Bradley" and stated: "I am writing you this hoping that you will help me with my responsibilities. I have been in the hospital with kidney stones." It then stated that her folks could not work because of age and that plaintiff was not asking money as a gift but only as a loan and that she would pay it back as soon as she got on her feet. A card which defendant admitted writing and sending in answer to the letter he claimed he received was admitted in evidence. This reads in part: "I should think you would realize that you have caused enough trouble in our house--especially the last time you were here. Any responsibility I have is to my family--Ruth, Jerry and Margaret, whom I [106 Cal. App. 2d 541] love and will do everything to protect and keep. I have no other interest but in them. Your unwelcome letter has done nothing but upset this entire house and we are not interested in your outcome. Your difficulties are not my responsibilities. I am interested only in my own family--have been and always will be."
Defendant denied any acts of sexual intercourse with plaintiff. A Mrs. Rutherford, who ran the boarding house where plaintiff stayed, testified that on one occasion she asked defendant, "Well, what about that key you have to the house?" and that laughingly he said, "That key like that won't fit anything." Defendant denied that he ever had such a key. A Mrs. Gardner testified that she lived near the boarding house and that in the early part of 1943 and during that summer she saw defendant and plaintiff together near the boarding house between 7:40 and 7:45 a. m. Defendant denied that he ever was with plaintiff at such time or place. Plaintiff testified that defendant would come to her room early in the morning. The court appointed a pathologist to make blood tests of defendant and the child. After making them, the doctor testified that they were inconclusive but they did not entirely rule out the possibility that defendant is the father of the child. Defendant's wife testified that she never left the house overnight without defendant during the time when plaintiff testified that defendant came to her room while Mrs. Bradley was staying overnight in San Francisco; that defendant worked for the Food Machinery Corporation every night from 5 p. m. to 3 a. m. from February, 1942, to mid October, 1943. This was to refute plaintiff's claim that defendant was at her room during July and August and particularly the week following October 4th, which was probably the period of conception. However, the records of the Food Machinery Corporation indicate that plaintiff did not work there after October 1. Mrs. Bradley testified that the sex relations between her and her husband were normal during all the time plaintiff claimed to be having intercourse with defendant. Mrs. Bradley contradicted other testimony of plaintiff. One Lucas testified that he worked the 5 p. m. to 3 a. m. shift with defendant and that the latter worked nightly until October 14. He did not know, however, when defendant left work.
It is apparent that there was a direct conflict in the evidence. The jury were polled and were found to be 9 to 3. [106 Cal. App. 2d 542]
The Claimed Error.
This brings us to the situation when the claimed error occurred. Defendant and his wife claimed that on the nights succeeding October 4th when plaintiff testified defendant was having intercourse with her he actually was at work at the plant of the Food Machinery Corporation. The payroll clerk of that company was on the stand with its records. He produced a "Time--Production--Pay" sheet which he claimed contained defendant's employment record for October. Defendant immediately objected on the ground that the sheet was that of A. A. Bradley and not O. A. Bradley, defendant's name. However, the sheet contained the clock number S. M. 75. Thereupon, to show that the sheet actually was that of defendant and that the A. A. initials were merely a clerical error, the witness testified that each employee had an identifying number and produced a "Tool Check Receipt" signed by defendant and containing the payroll number S. M. 75. He also produced an employment notice in the name of Oscar Arnold Bradley showing the same payroll number and a discharge or removal notice in the name of O. A. Bradley with the same payroll number. Thereupon plaintiff offered the three cards and the sheet in evidence. Defendant's only objection was that the sheet showed the name A. A. Bradley and not O. A. Bradley. The court overruled the objection and admitted the sheet and cards in evidence. It is the discharge or removal notice with which we are particularly concerned, the admission of which the court later held was sufficient error to justify granting a new trial. This card, dated October 11, 1943, shows the name O. A. Bradley and the payroll number S. M. 75. It states, on its face, "been laid off" and "cause for leaving--absent." On the back of the card there are certain boxes to be marked with an "X" to indicate the character of the employee or his work. In the column "competency," "good" is checked. In the column "conduct," "unreliable" is checked. In the column "speed," "medium" is checked. "Temperate?" "yes" is checked. "Do you recommend re-employment," "no" is checked. Under "Remarks" appears "absent."
In granting the motion for new trial the trial judge filed a memorandum in which he set forth, among other things, that the new trial was granted for "the reason that through inadvertence" there was admitted in evidence the back portion of the "Discharge or Removal Notice" upon which appeared unfavorable statements with regard to defendant's [106 Cal. App. 2d 543] work record, which statements "were clearly inadmissible as being incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial"; that the purpose in admitting this notice as well as the two other cards accompanying the "Time--Production--Pay Sheet" was to show that the sheet was in fact the record of defendant; that in ruling on the admissibility of these records the court considered only what appeared on the face of the document and was not apprised of the matter on the back of the notice card; that the court is convinced that the records were offered by plaintiff in good faith and properly and that all of the records with the exception of the back of the notice card were properly admitted; that the admission of this card was inadvertent and "was error and serious error and one which could have substantially affected the verdict"; that it did so affect the verdict is evidenced by the affidavit of the juror Leone. The court then pointed out that defendant offered in evidence a letter from the same employer containing statements favorable to defendant, which statements were, on objection, deleted from the letter. The records were taken by the jury into the jury room.
Plaintiff's attorney's affidavit used on motion for new trial pointed out that in offering the records including the card in question, no portion of the records was concealed from defendant's attorney, nor was the offer restricted to the face of the sheet or cards, nor was the purpose of the offer limited in any way; moreover, that the reporter's transcript shows that it was the defendant's attorney who apparently handed the records to the judge. The judge stated further: "... the evidence, although sufficient to sustain the verdict, as to many material facts is in sharp conflict and under the circumstances the error complained of may well have turned the scale against the defendant since the inadmissible matter considered by the jury had a direct bearing on his credibility as a witness."
There can be no question that, except the word "absent" which also appears on its face, the matter on the back of the card, if objected to, was inadmissible. [1] The credibility of a witness cannot be attacked by an employer's estimate of his character, conduct, temperateness or desirability for reemployment. [2] Generally, where a party fails to object to evidence which, as here, is partly admissible, he is deemed to have waived his right to object. "The party offering evidence is entitled to have the particular portion of the evidence objected to pointed out, and the specific [106 Cal. App. 2d 544] ground of the objection stated, in order that he may obviate the objection or waive the testimony, if he is unwilling to take the risk of error." (2 Cal.Jur. § 82, p. 264.) The rule is well stated in Bayers v. Barry, 114 Wash. 252 [194 P. 993], where appellants "made strenuous objection" to the introduction of a certain letter. "Unquestionably, parts of this letter are open to the objections made to it; but other parts of it are entirely proper to have been received in evidence. Had appellants asked the court to keep from the jury such portions of the letter as were objectionable, it would doubtless have been the court's duty to have complied therewith. This request, however, the appellants did not make; they objected to the introduction of the letter as a whole, and since parts of it were properly receivable, the appellants cannot now complain that the entire letter was received." (P. 996.) The rule is stated in another way in Crocker v. Carpenter, 98 Cal. 418, 421 [33 P. 271]: "When such a general objection is overruled by a trial court, the party against whom the ruling is made cannot be permitted for the first time to urge in the appellate court the particular objection which, if it had been openly urged in the trial court at the time of the ruling complained of, might have been easily cured. This is not laying down a merely technical rule. It is one which has its foundation in the proper consideration of what is due to the court and adverse counsel in the trial of a case."
[3] We are not dealing with a situation where a party is raising for the first time, on appeal, a contention that evidence was improperly admitted, but with a situation where, on motion for new trial, the trial court has found that it inadvertently admitted evidence which it would not have admitted had it known its true content, and which the court has found was not objected to through inadvertence. Moreover, it is a fair inference from the court's statement that it found that the plaintiff had offered the objectionable matter also through inadvertence. In the argument on the motion for new trial plaintiff's counsel stated, referring to the offer of the cards: "... I was not mindful, I don't know any other way to say it, but I was not mindful. It did not occur to me, I was not considering these matters on the back of these records, or I certainly would have called it to the attention of counsel and Court, although I don't know of any rule which requires that as a duty of counsel to be pointing out parts of evidence that might be objected to to opposing counsel." [106 Cal. App. 2d 545] Thus it appears that neither the attorney for plaintiff, the court, nor the attorney for defendant was considering the material on the back of the cards. We have a situation, then, in which, because of the inadvertence of both parties and the judge, inadmissible matter was given the jury; and, according to the judge who presided at the trial, that matter "may well have turned the scale" as the evidence, "although sufficient to sustain the verdict," was in "sharp conflict" as "to many material facts."
The minds of the parties and the court were concentrated on the question of tying in the time clock numbers on the O. A. Bradley cards with the time sheet of A. A. Bradley. While there was no limitation on the offer of the cards, it is obvious from a reading of the record that all concerned considered them as offered solely for the one purpose.
The rule stated in the Bayers case, supra, and in the Crocker case, to the effect that the burden of calling attention to the objectionable matter is on the party against whom the evidence is offered, is the general rule. However, there is some authority to the effect that the burden is on the party offering the evidence. "If several facts are included in the offer, some admissible and others inadmissible, then the whole (if properly objected to) is inadmissible; in other words, it is for the proponent to sever the good and the bad parts." (Wigmore on Evidence, 3d ed., vol. 1, § 17(b) (2), p. 320.)
The Bayers case is distinguishable from our case. There the party against whom the evidence was offered had full knowledge of the alleged prejudicial effect of the inadmissible portions. Likewise in the Crocker case the party against whom the evidence was offered, although fully familiar with the papers offered, failed to make any specific objections.
Plaintiff relies on the case of Bennett v. Nazzaro, 144 Misc. 450 [258 N.Y.Supp. 828]. In an action for personal injuries plaintiff, to prove ownership of the defendant's car, introduced a certified copy of defendant's application for registration of the car. On the back thereof, unknown to either of the attorneys, appeared information that defendant carried liability insurance and had been involved in a prior automobile accident. It was admitted without objection and taken to the jury room. Defendant moved to set aside a verdict in favor of plaintiff because of the admission in evidence of these statements on the back of the application. The judge, in denying the motion, stated that he did not think that this [106 Cal. App. 2d 546] information influenced the jury. He then stated that even if it did, defendant's failure to object to the introduction of the application barred him from raising the question on motion to set aside the verdict. He stated: "The certified copy application was competent evidence, and the defendant, not having discovered and objected to the information on the back thereof, cannot now be heard to complain that this incompetent evidence was examined and considered by the jury. ...
"The failure to object to incompetent evidence has been construed as a waiver, and when, as here, the evidence admitted is competent, the failure to object is fatal, and this is so notwithstanding no objection was made because the objecting party did not know the contents of the exhibit offered. Crane v. Powell, 139 N.Y. 379, 34 N.E. 911; Flora v. Carbean, 38 N.Y. 111; Ford v. Snook, 205 App.Div. 194, 199 N.Y.Supp. 630." (Pp. 831-832 [258 N.Y.Supp.].) However, the effect of the judge's statement is minimized by the following statement in his opinion (p. 831 [258 N.Y.Supp.]): "If the plaintiff's attorneys had known of the statements on the back of the card, it would have been their affirmative duty when offering the card in evidence to call the court's and their adversaries' attention to the back of the card, and then, of course, only the essential fact of White's ownership would have been given to the jury. Inasmuch as the plaintiff's attorneys did not have such knowledge, the mere fact that the card contained some information, which being offered by itself would have been excluded, does not make the receipt of the registration application incompetent." In our case the plaintiff's attorney did know of the objectionable material. Moreover, the trial judge there found that the inadmissible material was not prejudicial, while here, the trial judge found that it was. Secondly, the trial judge there did not find, as did the trial judge here, that the failure to object was excusable. The Bennett case and the cases therein cited, while somewhat persuasive, are not determinative of the question here. Under the peculiar circumstances of our case, the rule of those cases should not be followed. It is unfortunate that a case which involved the parenthood of a child and which took several days to try must be tried over again. However, it is important under our judicial system that a case be fairly tried. Certainly it cannot be said that a fair trial was had, where inadmissible evidence which the court found to be prejudicial got before the jury through the inadvertence of both parties and the [106 Cal. App. 2d 547] court. We have read the transcript and agree with the trial court that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the verdict. The trial judge who heard all the evidence in the case has held that the error was serious and might have affected the verdict. To upset this finding we would have to hold as a matter of law that the error could not have affected the verdict. This we cannot do. [4, 5] "It is settled that a motion for a new trial is, to a large extent, addressed to the legal discretion of the court to which the application is made and that its action is conclusive and will not be disturbed in the absence of a clear and affirmative showing of a gross, manifest or unmistakable abuse of discretion. (20 Cal.Jur. 27.) Such discretion is very wide and every presumption is indulged in support of the action of the court in passing upon the motion. The discretion must be reasonably exercised to the accomplishment of justice, and where there appears to be a reasonable or even fairly debatable justification therefor, an order granting a new trial will not be set aside, although a contrary order might not be disapproved or the appellate court might be inclined to take a different view. (20 Cal.Jur. 30.)" (Whitfield v. Debrincat, 18 Cal. App. 2d 730, 733-734 [64 P.2d 960].)
2. The Leone Affidavit.
On the motion for new trial, the affidavits of three jurors were offered in evidence. Two of these affidavits were denied admission. [6] The third, that of juror Leone, was admitted on the theory that it did not tend to impeach her verdict but to support it. This affidavit should not have been admitted as it did tend to impeach the juror's verdict. The affidavit stated that the juror considered the matter on the back of the card "as impeaching Bradley's testimony because I felt that if his employer could not rely upon him that I could not rely upon his testimony in the case; the fact that Mr. Bradley was not reliable in the opinion of his employer, Food Machinery Corporation, was discussed by me and various other members of the jury during our deliberation in the jury room, and was of such magnitude as to affect my verdict ..." It is conceded that affidavits of jurors may not be used to contradict, impeach or defeat the verdict. (20 Cal.Jur. § 41, p. 61; 46 Corpus Juris, § 379(h), p. 358; Saltzman v. Sunset Tel. etc. Co., 125 Cal. 501 [58 P. 169]; Toomes v. Nunes, 24 Cal. App. 2d 395 [75 P.2d 94].) Jurors' affidavits, however, are permissible to substantiate their verdicts. [106 Cal. App. 2d 548] (20 Cal.Jur. § 41, p. 61.) The only purpose in offering the Leone affidavit was to show that her verdict was based primarily on the objectionable evidence, and hence it obviously was in impeachment of her verdict. In Bennett v. Nazzaro, supra (258 N.Y.Supp. 828), it was held (p. 830): "Jurors' affidavits will sometimes be received to sustain a verdict, but should not be received in a case like this, where it is claimed that the jury was influenced by improper evidence." [7] But the fact that the Leone affidavit was erroneously admitted does not cause a reversal of the court's order granting a new trial. The trial judge had a right to assume that the information on the back of the card had the effect on the jury that ordinarily would be expected. Moreover, the judge's statement shows that he came to his conclusion of the prejudice of the evidence irrespective of the affidavit, for he said: "It is apparent, I believe, that the admission into evidence of the card last referred to, containing the objectionable matter, was error and serious error and one which could have substantially affected the verdict." He then stated: "That it did so affect the verdict is evidenced by" the Leone affidavit. We are satisfied that while the admission of that affidavit was error, it was without prejudice, as the court had concluded without it that the objectionable evidence might reasonably have affected the verdict. It must be remembered in this connection that the verdict was 9 to 3.
The order refusing to strike the affidavit of juror Leone, being otherwise reviewable, is not appealable and the purported appeal therefrom is dismissed. The other order appealed from is affirmed. Each party shall bear his own costs.
Peters, P. J., and Wood (Fred B.), J., concurred.
Get free summaries of new California Court of Appeal opinions delivered to your inbox!


The man's case is being considered at hearings in the Court of Protection, where judges analyse issues relating to mentally-ill people who lack the capacity to make decisions, in London.
Mr Justice Mostyn analysed interim issues at a preliminary hearing on Friday.
He heard the man was suspected of voyeurism and was on police bail pending further inquiries.
Council social services bosses with responsibility for his welfare want a judge to decide whether the man's behaviour means he should leave his mother's care and move into a specialist unit.
They say a judge should make decisions about what is in the man's best interests and about how best to protect the public.
A further hearing is due to take place in July.
Mr Justice Mostyn agreed the man could stay at his mother's home pending the next hearing after she promised to monitor him.
She said she would keep him in "line of sight supervision" when he was in the community, would make sure he was either with her or a carer when at home, and would tell police if he absconded.
Little detail about the man's mental health problems emerged at Friday's hearing.
Mr Justice Mostyn had discussions with lawyers representing social services bosses and the man, and the man's mother.
He said a key issue would relate to the man's mental capacity to use the internet and social media.
Lawyers said a specialist would assess that.
The judge said the man could not be identified in media reports of the case.
Copyright (c) Press Association Ltd. 2019, All Rights Reserved. Picture (c) Nick Ansell / PA Wire.


I apologize, which machine ?? if either ??
Yes, IBM patented rectangular holes in 1928 !! Started producing the equipment a few years later.
026 w little box on side in CHM?
Subject: 026 and data translator Stan, Ed, Dave et.al.
The 026 that we have on display in the Punched Card gallery has a box attached that is a teleprocessing unit of some kind. I'm trying jto identify what it is.
So, the question is what is "data translator?"
It must be a teleprocessing receiving unit.
I cannot find out anything about it on the net. If it was a product, I should be able to find it somewhere.
It just looks like an RPQ. It has a somewhat "unfinished" look to it.
My guess is that when Poughkeepsie developed the 1001 (then transferred to Endicott), there was no receiving unit in place that was STR (The Transceiver was "start-stop"). So they got Endicott to pout together an RPQ.
Can any of you shed any light on what I have found and guessed?
Somewhere in the IBM documentation, I saw where a field office would call Poughkeepsie using a dial-up modem and order a computer system by feeding cards into a local reader that would then be punched at the Poughkeepsie end. Each card was an option for the new system.
I think the translation was to convert the 12 punches to ASCII and then from ASCII back to the 12 punches of the card.
I do the ASCII to 12 punches in the 1401 room now.
That is how we punch program cards from the output of the PC version of Autocoder.
Maybe this was an internal device for use within IBM.
Of all of the IBM 026 keypunches built, I expect that only a small percentage of them have this attachment. Which begs the question of why is a very unique keypunch on display instead of a vanilla 026 like we have in the 1401 room?
I think our team can make the unit work on a communication line from a generic CT terminal across the room. That id if anybody else thinks that would be interesting to the visitors.
The Radar Picket ships used IBM 026 and 066 machines, plus TTY to transmit track data to the the East and West coast centers. They seemed pretty reliable, except when some one spilled a coke on the 066, rather sticky mess...I am not sure how early they were used as I was aboard from 1962 , (Radar "a" school in June 62.. 26 wks). To decommissioning in July 1965.
To acquire the data about the parts to be feed into the 305 some IBM 066/068 Transceivers were installed. The 066 was a modified 026 Keypunch and the 068 was a small electronic unit that held all the pluggable units and power supply- Transceivers could be connected over leased phone lines and a deck of cards placed in the transmitting unit.
It would read the cards and send the data one column at a time to the receiving machine. which would punch a duplicate deck of cards at the other end. There was no difference between the transmitting and receiving machine. Holes punched in a card on the program drum determined what the machine did. If you punched an 8 hole in column one of the program card that machine became the transmitter.
The 068 had pluggable resonate circuits that controlled the frequency it used. Four different pairs of Transceivers could operate on the same phone line at the same time.
There is a picture of a standard IBM 066/068 Transceiver System. The 068 is the electronic box full of single vacuum tube plugable units. There were 12 2D21 Gas Thyratron tubes used to energize the punch magnets and others for things like feed the next card.
Each machine has a name plate with the machine type on it. Each system was capable of operating in either send or receive mode. If the card on the program drum had an 8 in column 1 that machine was in send (transmit) mode. There was an octal socket in the top of the 068 that you could plug a small unit into to select 1 of 4 channels you could operate on. Audio tones in different bands were sent down the phone line. 4 systems could operate at the same time independent of direction.
If your box does not have a 068 name plate it is probably an RPQ device.
Jim, this was the way they ordered equipment when I joined IBM in 1964. The process was to select a machine type and its features from a tub-file (one for each machine being ordered) and then feed the cards one-by-one into a 1001. It was a standard machine that IBM sold as well as used internally. The cards were read and then the quantity was entered using the touch-tone keypad on the 1001.
As I recall, the transmission used tone mode for the data transmission. Remember that phone connections at that time were analog dial-up, but allowed tones after the connection was made. I don't remember when this process changed -- definitely before I left the branch in 1968.
I agree with Stan's comments on the uncommon 026 in R|evolution which definitely looks like the one in your 1001 link [above]. ... My recollection is that there were both transmitting 026s and receiving 026s -- not an offering with both capabilities.


Samir Iqbal, UTA associate professor of electrical engineering.
The key to fighting cancer in many cases is early detection, and earlier detection at the cellular level could mean survival for many cancer patients.
A University of Texas at Arlington electrical engineer has developed a novel cancer cell detection method that will improve early diagnosis through a tool that tracks cellular behavior in real time using nanotextured walls that mimic layers of body tissue.
Samir Iqbal, an associate professor in the Electrical Engineering Department, detailed his team's results in a recent Nature Scientific Reports paper called "Effects of Nanotexture on Electrical Profiling of Single Tumor Cell and Detection of Cancer from Blood in Microfluidic Channels."
Iqbal worked on the project with Young-tae Kim, a UTA associate professor in the Bioengineering Department; Muhymin Islam, a STEM doctoral candidate; and engineering students Mohammad Motasim Bellah, Adeel Sajid and Mohammad Raziul Hasan.
Iqbal said his team noted the many layers of tissue in the human body and decided to develop something that would mimic that layering.
"The answer was in creating a nanotextured wall that fools blood samples into thinking its actual tissue," Iqbal said. "We used inherent properties of the cell walls to create a diagnostic tool. The cancer cells behave differently as they come into contact with the nanotextured walls. They dance."
Identifying those "dancing cells" will help doctors pinpoint cancer cells and start treatment earlier than allowed with current technology.
"Discovering the cancer earlier, before it metastasizes, is essential to surviving cancer," Iqbal said. "Our device has the potential to do that."
The published results stem from a 2014 $480,000 National Science Foundation grant that funded the design and creation of the device.
Khosrow Behbehani, dean of the UTA College of Engineering, said Iqbal's research is groundbreaking.
"Dr. Iqbal and his colleagues are bringing engineering innovation to meet the challenge of early cancer detection," Behbehani said. "The research aligns with UTA's Strategic Plan, particularly the focus on Health and the Human Condition. Dr. Iqbal's device could greatly improve cancer survival rates, which is good news for humanity. There are very few people around the world whose lives have not been touched by this dreadful disease."
Strange, I now have access.


The 25 numbered normal ranks in Ranked play.
Ranked (also known as Ranked Play) is the serious side of Play mode, with players able to earn special ranks to reflect their prowess in battle this season. Winning and losing matches can gain or lose players rank, with the player's rank determining matchmaking. There are two separate Ranked ladders, one for each game format: Ranked Standard and Ranked Wild.
Each player's rank is reflected in a special medal, visible during Ranked play and in the Quest Log. 50 numbered ranks exist, with the Legend rank above those. The Legend rank additionally shows the player's precise numerical ranking in their region. The player's current rank is also displayed on their friends list, using whichever is higher of their Standard or Wild ranks.
Ranked play occurs in seasons, each a month long. At the end of each season, rewards are handed out, and each player's rank is reset 4 ranks lower than the highest rank attained during the season. Rewards mostly come in the form of Standard format golden cards and arcane dust, and are determined by the player's highest rank that season. Winning 5 games in Ranked will earn that season's unique card back, while reaching Legend during any season will award the Legend card back.
There are 25 new player ranks, 25 regular ranks, and an extra rank, 'Legend' above that. Each rank has its own medal and title, with ranks 2-25 named after minions from the game. Note that ranks are numbered in decreasing order: the smaller the number, the higher the rank.
Each rank has up to 5 slots waiting to be filled with stars, and once all slots have been filled, earning another star will grant the player the next rank with a single star. Above each of the milestone ranks (20, 15, 10, 5 and Legend) losing games will also cause players to lose stars, and potentially ranks (a player can never fall below a milestone rank within a season). At the end of the season ranks are reset according to the usual rules, regardless of milestones.
The winning streak feature grants players a bonus star if they also won the previous two ranked matches (below Rank 5).
This means that winning three games, followed by losing three games, will result in a net gain of one star.
Winning five games, followed by losing five games, will result in a net gain of three stars.
Note that games do not need to be played in the same session to qualify as a winning streak.
Ranked season card backs are earned by winning five Ranked games during the season. After each game, a pop-up interface lets the player know how many wins they still need to earn the card back. Progress on winning the card back can be checked by visiting the Quest Log.
Ranks 50 to 26 are exclusive to new players. New players start at rank 50: Brave Rooster, and earn 3 Classic card packs upon reaching milestones at Rank 45, 40, 35, and 30. Upon reaching Rank 25, the player earn 2 Classic packs and 2 packs for each of the most recent four Hearthstone expansions. Players cannot lose stars in these ranks; if a player chooses they can skip over the "new player" ranks and start at Rank 25, but they will not get the associated card packs.
New players are rewarded 3 Classic card packs after reaching Rank 45, 40, 35, and 30. Upon reaching Rank 25, the player will also earn 2 Classic packs and 2 packs each of the most recent four Hearthstone expansions.
Legend rank. The number indicates that the player is ranked 275th in their region.
Players that achieve Rank 15 or higher during their Hearthstone career cannot fall below Rank 20.
If the player is in the top 10,000 Legend players in their region, their precise ranking will be displayed inside their medal. For example, if a player's Legend medal shows the number 275, that player is currently ranked the 275th best Ranked player in their region.
Each rank can be attained with no stars, some stars, or all stars collected. Once all stars for a rank have been collected, gaining another will take the player to the next rank, with a single star displayed. However, losing that star will not return the player to the previous rank, but will simply remove the star, leaving them on the new higher rank with no stars. Losing another star from this position will cause the player to drop a rank, but will leave them a single star missing.
The consequence of this is that any given rank with full stars is equal in value to the next rank up with no stars. The difference is that full stars in any rank can only be attained through winning the last match played, while no stars can only be gained through losing the previous match, or when first starting at Rank 50: Brave Rooster.
If you have full stars for a rank, and win a game, all stars plus bonus stars (if applicable) will be applied straight to the next rank upon attaining the stars. For example, if you are on rank 10 with 5 stars, and you win your next match, one star will be applied straight onto rank 9, making it 1/5. If you were to receive a bonus star due to a streak begun on this match, you would be on 2/5 stars on rank 9.
Win streak bonus stars stop being awarded at Rank 5 and higher. However, bonus stars earned at Rank 6 can carry the player one or two stars into Rank 5.
The milestone ranks take pressure off players, preventing losing streaks from bringing them below a certain level. They also allow room for experimentation with new decks or modifications, or simply fun with less reliable decks; being unable to lose rank allows the player to then resume their laddering efforts from where they left off.
Because stars cannot be lost below Rank 20, it can be considered possible for all players to reach Rank 20, given sufficient time. It can therefore be argued that the ranking system truly begins at Rank 20, with the lower ranks serving as a launch pad into the real competition.
Each month of Ranked play is called a season. At the start of each Ranked play season ranks are reset, with each player's new rank determined by the highest rank attained in the previous season. This new rank is exactly 4 ranks below their highest standing including the number of stars in that rank earned. (For example, a player whose rank at the end of the season was Rank 1, 3 stars resets to Rank 5, 3 stars.) However, if the player has ever achieved Rank 15 or higher, they will never drop below Rank 20.
The first time the player logs in, or enters a match, following the start of the new season, they will be shown a special announcement informing them of their rank at the end of that season, the number of stars they have earned, their rank at the start of the new season, and the ranking percentile they achieved during the last season of play, intended to reflect the position of the player's rank within the total pool of active players in that region. Note that although the season reset process displays the player's rank at the end of the season, all rewards are based on their highest rank that season, with the rank at which a player ends a season having no impact on either rewards or placement.
Note that if activated by the start of a match, the season reset window will appear during the mulligan phase, and will prevent the player from selecting cards or taking any other action until it has been removed, including waiting for its animations to complete. If playing during a season reset it is therefore recommended to log out in order to avoid disruption.
This combined with the milestone ranks means the lowest a player who reached a milestone the previous season can drop to at the beginning of the next season is 24, 19, 14, 9, and 4 for 20, 15, 10, 5, and Legend respectively.
Matchmaking at ranks 1-25 is determined by each player's rank and number of stars, aiming to match players against others of equal or similar rank.
While the match is usually fairly close, sometimes players are matched against others of far lower or higher rank. This appears to depend on the pool of available players at the time, with the matchmaking system accepting looser matches if necessary in order to ensure players are not left queueing for too long. However, gains and losses from matches are fixed, and do not vary based on the player's relative ranks.
Players at Legend rank are matched according to a hidden Ranked matchmaking rating (MMR). MMR is in fact tracked during all Ranked Play activity, but only affects matchmaking involving at least one Legend rank player. MMR also determines the player's initial numbered seeding upon reaching Legend rank.
Participating in Ranked play can earn players special rewards, through several means: the Highest Rank Bonus chest, card backs and golden heroes.
At the end of each season, players who have won 5 games or more in either game format (Standard or Wild) will be granted a Highest Rank Bonus chest (also known as a Ranked Chest) containing rewards based on their highest rank attained that season, using whichever is higher of their Standard or Wild ranks.
Rewards may be golden cards of common, rare or epic rarity (not legendary) , and Arcane Dust. As with Arena rewards, only cards available in Standard format card packs will be awarded. Card packs themselves do not feature as rewards. All card rewards are craftable, allowing them to be disenchanted if desired.
The Ranked Chest is partly intended to encourage players who have achieved a high seasonal rank to enjoy Ranked play, without worrying about losing rank in subsequent matches.
Rewards are handed out from the Highest Rank Bonus chest, corresponding to the player's highest rank, each with its own comical title, based on the matching rank. Precise legend numbering does not affect rewards.
A new chest is available every 5 ranks (Legend seemingly awards the same chest as ranks 5-1, but actually features different contents). For example, the Shieldbearer's Footlocker is awarded for ranks between 20 and 16, while the Ogre Magi's Stash is awarded for ranks between 10 and 6. The chest determines the number and rarity of rewards, although individual cards are still selected randomly, with a chance to be from any Standard format set. All chests except that awarded at Legend include Arcane Dust. The amount of arcane dust awarded is determined by how high the player's rank is within that chest's rank range, ranging from 5 to 25 in increments of 5.
Due to the substantial reward increase from rank 6 to rank 5 (280 Dust value), many experienced players will aim for at least rank 5 during a season even if they don't plan on pushing to Legend.
Since card backs are awarded separately from the Battle chests (it is based on 5 wins regardless of rank) it is possible to get the previous season's Ranked card back without getting to Rank 20.
Each season brings with it a unique card back, acquired through winning 5 games in ranked by the end of the season. Since the card back is acquired by winning games rather as part of battle chests players must win 5 games in ranked play simply logging in is not enough regardless of where last season's Rank automatically placed them. These card backs are designed to be available to all players for participating in that season. Since the card back is won via winning 5 ranked games regardless of Rank it is possible to get a card back without reaching rank 20 but given one can't lose stars below the milestones (20, 15, 10, 5) it makes sense to go for as high a rank as possible to make the next season Battle chests easier to get.
Whenever a player completes 500 wins in Ranked play or Arena mode with a given hero, that hero will be permanently replaced with a golden version. These are similar to golden cards, with golden borders and special animations for the hero and their Hero Power, and will automatically be used instead of the regular version. Players can track their win progress to a golden hero on the Ranked deck selection interface.
If a player wins 500 games as Ragnaros the Firelord (hero), the golden version of Ragnaros will be earned, note that the player is only required to finish the games as Ragnaros, and not to start with him.
From January 2015 to August 2015, players who were in the top 100 Legendary players at the end of the season received qualifying points for the 2015 Hearthstone World Championship. See that page for details.
Each month of Ranked play is known as a 'season'. At the start of each season all players' ranks are reset, depending on their previous rank. Each season offers its own reward for participation, in the shape of a special card back. Previously, this was rewarded to players reaching at least Rank 20. As of March 2018, this will be rewarded to players winning 5 ranked matches. The remaining duration of the current season is displayed for the player upon reaching 10, 5 and 3 days from the end of each season.
Dates for the North America region are given below; precise dates and times may vary by region. Currently, each season ends at 11:59 PM PST in the Americas region, and 11:59 PM UTC in the Europe region.
Season 61 April 2019 "Card of Shadows"
Season 60 March 2019 "Kul Tiras"
Season 59: Pizza Stone February 2019 "Pizza Stone"
Season 58: Just Chillin' January 2019 "Chillin'"
Season 57: Friend of the Frostwolf December 2018 "Frostwolf"
Season 56: All's Well That Moonwell November 2018 "Moonwell"
Season 55: Defias the Odds October 2018 "VanCardback"
Season 54: On the Level September 2018 "Dr. Boom's Lab"
Season 53: Refreshing Lemonade August 2018 "Lemonade"
Season 52: Put Your Faith in the Lightforged July 2018 "Lightforged"
Season 51: Back in Blue June 2018 "Back in Blue"
Season 49: Raise the Roof April 2018 "Raise the Roof"
Season 48: Mammoth Memories March 2018 "Year of the Mammoth"
Season 47: Savage Sparkles February 2018 "Sparkles"
Season 46: Frostfire January 2018 "Frostfire"
Season 45: Gear Up, Get Down! December 2017 "Catacomber"
Season 44: Hooked on a Reelin' November 2017 "Gone Fishin'"
Season 43: Unholy Horror Knights! October 2017 "Unholy Knight"
Season 42: Furious Frost Knights! September 2017 "Frost Knight"
Season 41: Blood Knight Bash! August 2017 "Blood Knight"
Season 40: HearthS'mores July 2017 "HearthS'mores"
Season 39: The Magic of Dalaran June 2017 "The Magic of Dalaran"
Season 38: Sunwell Unleashed! May 2017 "Sunwell"
Season 37: Un'Goro Bound! April 2017 "Un'Goro Mystery"
Season 36: Let's Get Kraken! March 2017 "Year of the Kraken"
Season 35: Come one, Kabal! February 2017 "Kabal"
Season 34: Grimestreet's Back! January 2017 "Grimy Goons"
Season 33: Paid in Jade December 2016 "Jade Lotus"
Season 32: Over the Halfhill! November 2016 "Halfhill"
Season 31: The Pie is Not a Lie! October 2016 "Pie"
Season 30: The Burning Legion September 2016 "Legion"
Season 29: An Intriguing Invitation August 2016 "Medivh's Invitation"
Season 28: Tanned Tinyfins July 2016 "Tinyfin Beach"
Season 27: Back in Zul'drak June 2016 "Zul'Drak"
Season 26: Shadowmoon Shenanigans May 2016 "Shadowmoon Valley"
Season 25: Clutches of Evil! April 2016 "Clutch of Yogg-Saron"
Season 24: Riverpaw Ruffian March 2016 "Hogger"
Season 23: We're Not Bluffin' February 2016 "Tauren Thunderbluff"
Season 22: You've Won My ♥-Stone January 2016 "Love Is in the Air"
Season 21: The Slammin' Shaman December 2015 "Shaman Thrall"
Season 20: The League of Explorers! November 2015 "Explorer's Map"
Season 19: Highmaulin' and Brawlin' October 2015 "Highmaul"
Season 18: Exodar's Exodus September 2015 "Exodar"
Season 17: The Grand Tournament! August 2015 "Tournament Grounds"
Season 16: Darkspear Delight! July 2015 "Darkspear"
Season 15: Nature Rises! June 2015 "Darnassus"
Season 14: Go Ninja, Go! May 2015 "Ninja"
Season 13: Sweet, Sweet Victory! April 2015 "Cupcake"
Season 12: Raging Ragnaros! March 2015 "Ragnaros"
Season 11: Luminous Lunar New Year! February 2015 "Lunar"
Season 10: Marauding Maraad! January 2015 "Maraad"
Season 9: Go Big or Go Gnome! December 2014 "Gnomes"
Season 8: Lobbin' Goblins! November 2014 "Goblins"
Season 7: Hallow's End! October 2014 "Hallow's End"
Season 6: Plundering Pirates! September 2014 "Pirates!"
Season 5: The Chill of Icecrown August 2014 "Icecrown"
Season 4: The Dread Necropolis July 2014 "Naxxramas"
Season 3: Colors of the Rainbow! June 2014 "Rainbow!"
Season 2: Brave the Black Temple May 2014 "Black Temple"
Season 1: Pandamonium April 2014 "Pandaria"
While the ranks provide a handy guide to your progression within the Ranked play system, they do not directly state your success in relation to other players. However, while ranks change rapidly over the course of each season, by the conclusion of any season a certain percentage of players will have attained each rank. With a knowledge of the percentage of players at each rank, it is therefore possible to state a player's overall ranking within their region's Ranked play competitors.
NB: The above figures appear to include rounding up, since the combined total equals 100.5% of players. However, it is assumed this does not majorly affect the overall proportions represented by the statistics.
One characteristic of this distribution is that players commonly underestimate their true ranking within their region, due to the disproportionately small number of players reaching the higher ranks, as referenced by Blizzard in the title of their report - "You're Better Than You Think!" A player exactly half way up through the ranking system (Rank 13, Legend excluded) may expect to be better than precisely 50% of other players, when they are in fact ranked above at least 80% of their peers.
When total stars are taken into account, 75% of players can be seen to inhabit roughly the bottom 20% of possible rankings, with the other 80% of rankings populated by the top 25% of players. The true "top half" of rankings is populated by roughly 5% of players, with the other 95% of players occupying the lower "half" of possible ranks.
One important factor to take into account is that these numbers include players of all levels of participation. Included are those who have played every single day and spent lots of money and/or gold on packs, as well as those who have barely played that season and who are mostly relying on basic cards.
At the least, these percentages should be considered a reflection of performance, not ability or true potential. Players who find less time to climb the ladder will inevitably end the season with lower ranks, and factors such as which cards are owned, and whether the deck is handmade or copied from an expertly-crafted decklist, will continue to affect the player's success.
A greater variety of classes and deck types tend to be found at lower ranks.
Ranked accounts for the majority of games played in Play mode, as of November 2016.
The rank system has certain characteristics which affect the nature and overall pattern of matchmaking in Play mode. Firstly, player ranks are subject to a soft-reset at the start of each season, reducing players to a rank 4 levels below what they achieved in the previous season. This combined with the floors at 20, 15, 10, 5, and Legend means that players start out close to their 'true' rank even early in the season. This is far better than the pre-March 2018 system where players would start out the new season between Rank 25 and Rank 16. With patch 13.0 player who reach rank 15 can never go below rank 20.
One consequence of this is that matchmaking is between players of roughly equal skill rather than the situation seen with the pre March 2018 system where highly and less skilled players could face each other. The March 2018 change prevents the situation where a Rank 15 player could face a previous Legend rank player, who due to not having played since the season reset, was currently placed at Rank 16, thus providing a surprisingly stiff and rapidly overwhelming challenge from this apparently lower-ranked contender. Between the level floors and 4 ranks less next season mechanics this situation is now impossible.
Due to the overall shape of player distribution through the ranks, matchmaking also tends to be most precise at roughly Ranks 20-15 (although this will shift over the course of a season). Matchmaking at these ranks usually succeeds in finding a player of almost equal stars, presumably due to the large pool of players at these ranks. In contrast, at higher ranks it is common to see pairings between players with several ranks' difference, while Ranks 25-21 often feature pairings separated by 2 or more ranks. In both cases this is likely due to a far sparser selection of players from which to find suitable opponents.
Another feature of Ranked play is the win-streak feature. This allows players winning more than two games in a row to gain an extra star each time they win a game, below Rank 5. This is useful for higher-ranked players when they begin playing each season, accelerating their ascent to an appropriate rank, but also acts to drive all players toward higher ranks, in turn further causing the average player rank to improve over the course of a season. The lack of a complementary lose-streak feature also makes uneven play rewarding - win-streaks followed by lose-streaks offer more bonus stars than the overall win:loss ratio, and can cause players to gain in rank even when they lose more matches than they win.
In theory, the win-streak feature may mean that given enough time and the right matches, almost all players would reach Rank 5. Most players at higher ranks would therefore likely end up Legends. Consider that if two Rank 25 players were to face each other continuously in Ranked play, taking turns to win a streak of games before then losing an equal streak of games, each player would in fact slowly gain in rank due to the stars awarded from their win-streaks. Given enough time, these two players would eventually reach Rank 5, without requiring any progression in their decks or abilities. If this type of progression were to occur with a large enough group of players, one would only need to be moderately superior in ability to the worst of these players in order to reach Legend rank. If this model is indeed also applicable to the larger and more random pairings found in actual Ranked matchmaking, it can be considered that there is no 'correct' rank, only the rank which players are able to reach before the end of the season, with longer seasons offering proportionately greater ranking opportunities.
On January 25th, 2018, Ben Brode announced the changes for Ranked, which were implemented at the beginning of the March season. These included limiting the number of ranks dropped by 4 after each season, and setting the number of stars per rank to 5 for all players. This was done in order to better balance matchmaking at the start of a season, as well as give the same sense of progression to each player while playing on the ladder.
In the old system, players would be awarded a medal at the end of each week, based upon their current rank.
Queuing for a Ranked game in the early beta. The medal indicates the player's rank, while the small icon in the top-right corner serves to toggle Ranked and Unranked play. The bar at the top indicated queue progress, prior to the addition of the Finding Opponent screen. Also of note are the old hero portraits.
During the game's beta test, and prior to December 2013's Patch 1.0.0.4217, a notably different ranked system was used in Hearthstone.
Like the current system, there were several available ranks, each of which could have 0-3 stars, and the player's current rank was displayed on the Play mode deck selection screen. However, winning or losing a match did not usually result in the player gaining or losing stars. Players would often have to achieve a reasonable win-streak to earn an additional star, and could stand to lose several games without losing stars. Matchmaking was also less transparent, as player rank was not displayed during battles, and some posters on the official forums contended that the matchmaking pool for both Ranked and Unranked play (the original name for 'Casual' play) was in fact the same.
Rank was reset at the end of each week, which raised some complaint from less active players. Once the ranks reset, upon logging in each player would be awarded a medal equal to their previous rank. The intention was to have players collect these medals, either for vanity or for some other more useful purpose. However, this was never implemented before the system was changed.
Unlike the 26 detailed and iconic named ranks of the current system, the original 9 ranks were named more traditionally: Novice, Journeyman, Copper, Silver, Gold, Platinum, Diamond, Master and Grand Master. The term "Three-Star Master" was commonly used to refer to the highest level below Grand Master, and was often used as a standard for high-level play. These medals are still used for Arena keys, although some of them have been given different names, or adapted slightly.
Ranked mode was originally known as "Weekly Tournament".
With Patch 1.0.0.4217, the system was overhauled, replacing the previous rank system with 26 brand new ranks and rebranding Unranked as 'Casual' play. The new ranks featured icons and names derived from minion cards, and the number of stars for the higher ranks was expanded to 4 or 5. The new system was far more transparent than the previous design; player rank was displayed during battle for each player. While the match was not always precise, it allowed players to understand the occasionally notable disparity between opponents, and helped to make the matchmaking process more transparent. Separate MMRs for Ranked and Casual were confirmed.
In comparison to the hidden and lethargic rank-changes of the previous system, the new system simply granted one star for each win, and removed one for each loss. A specific win-streak feature was also added, awarding bonus stars upon winning more than 2 games in a row - until Rank 5, at least. Finally, the weekly reset was changed to take place at the end of each new 'season' of play, allowing players more time to climb the ladder, and fitting plans for future rewards.
Immediately preceding the release of Hearthstone, Patch 1.0.0.4944 saw further adjustments to Ranked Play mode. Most significant was the change of the season reset from a complete reset to a soft reset, with each player's rank increased by one star for each rank they previously held. Prior to this, at the start of each season all players would be reset to Rank 25: Angry Chicken, throwing the previous season's Legend rank players in with the newest and least experienced. One result of this was an extremely unpredictable and often challenging experience at the start of each season, with newer players often unable to gain any stars due to repeatedly being matched against high-level players, and Legend rank players sometimes battling each other simply in order to rise above Rank 25. The new system allowed higher-rank players to start each season at a higher rank, preventing the mayhem of Legend rank Angry Chickens, and allowing lower ranked players to pick up roughly where they left off at the end of the last season, without a protracted period of lose-streaks.
With the end of the beta test seasons, this patch also finally saw the implementation of the planned rewards for Ranked play, in the form of golden heroes and the introduction of card backs. The new seasons began to take shape as strictly monthly terms determined by the calendar, complete with names and unique rewards, with the remaining duration of the current season displayed to players in-game.
The next change to the system would not come until Patch 3.0.0.9786, with the addition of the Highest Rank Bonus Chest. For the first time, this added tangible rewards for improving your rank, aside from the seasonal card back at Rank 20 and the Legend card back at Legend rank.
"We're continuously looking for ways to refine the Ranked Play experience. One thing we can do immediately to help the Ranked Play experience is to make the overall climb from rank to rank feel like more an accomplishment once you hit a certain milestone. In order to promote deck experimentation and reduce some of the feelings of ladder anxiety some players may face, we're introducing additional Ranked Play floors.
Once a player hits Rank 15, 10, or 5, they will no longer be able to de-rank past that rank once it is achieved within a season, similar to the existing floors at Rank 20 and Legend. For example, when a player achieves Rank 15, regardless of how many losses a player accumulates within the season, that player will not de-rank back to 16. We hope this promotes additional deck experimentation between ranks, and that any losses that may occur feel less punishing."
The advent of game formats, Standard and Wild, in April 2016 brought substantial changes throughout Hearthstone, but perhaps most significantly in its effects on Ranked play. This marked the first time previously released cards had been barred from use in any game mode (aside from the odd Tavern Brawl), and the arrival of Standard format provoked a strong reaction among many players, for the first time facing losing the option to play with a sizable portion of their hard-won cards.
Where previously there had only been a single Ranked ladder, there were now two separate ladders for Ranked Standard and Ranked Wild, with players able to choose between two different paths for pursuing their laddering ambitions. Players rank's were initially set based on the player's current rank at the point game formats are added to the game, with the two ladders independent from then on.
The system of minion cards used to represent the ranks does not strictly adhere to any single rule. The main pattern is an increase in mana cost at higher ranks, although this is not entirely consistent; Silvermoon Guardian, Dread Corsair, Big Game Hunter, and The Black Knight break the order, the latter quite notably. There is also an increase in rarity at the higher ranks, with Ranks 6, 5, 4 and 3 being epic, and Rank 2 being legendary (Rank 1's Innkeeper presumably trumping even legendary status), but below this the rarity is fairly random, with even Rank 25 being rare, while Rank 8 is a common Basic card. In addition, there is clearly an intention to have less valuable or effective minions at the lower ranks, with the quality, value and power of the minions growing as the rank increases. This fits quite well with the increase in rarity, and is best depicted by Angry Chicken at Rank 25, as well as the innkeeper himself at Rank 1.
...including last season's card back.
…and made into a new rank for the new season.
Upon achieving certain milestones in Ranked Play, it will no longer be possible to lose ranks beyond those milestones for that season. The milestones are Rank 20, 15, 10, 5, and Legend.
With the arrival of game formats, Ranked has been split into Ranked Standard and Ranked Wild. Rewards are now based on whichever rank is highest.
A bonus chest will be granted at the end of each season based on the highest rank reached in Ranked Play mode.
Patch 2.4.0.8311 (2015-03-31): The end of season rank announcement now includes a percentile for the player's success on that month's Ranked play ladder: "That puts you in the top _% of our ranked play players!"
March 21st 2014: The remaining duration of the current Ranked season is now displayed upon logging into the game, or entering Play mode. This system was added with Patch 1.0.0.4944, but not activated until March 21st.
Rewards for ranked play have been implemented.
↑ 2.0 2.1 Blizzard Entertainment (November 29, 2018). Hearthstone Update – November 29 – Rastakhan's Rumble!. Retrieved on 2018-11-30.
↑ Tested by User:Taohinton, end of August 2016 season. Highest rank of 19, ended at rank 20. The display stated my rank as 20, but awarded me 6 bonus stars, resulting in a rank of Argent Squire, 2 stars.
↑ Patch 1.0.0.4217 - In Ranked Play, you'll be pitted against opponents equal to or as close to your rank as possible.
↑ 8.0 8.1 Ben Brode on reddit. (2017-01-11).
↑ Casual mode is brutal. (2015-01-30).
↑ 11.0 11.1 11.2 Zeriyah on Twitter. (2015-03-27).
↑ Zeriyah on Twitter. (2015-03-27).
↑ Whirthun on Twitter. (2015-08-19).
↑ Whirthun on Twitter. (2015-08-05).
↑ The Grand Tournament at gamescom. (2015-08-05).
↑ Dust value indicates the amount of Arcane Dust earned by disenchanting the reward cards plus any additional rewarded dust. This shows how much each rank is "worth", which may help with setting ranking goals.
↑ Dust gain indicates the change in dust value from the previous rank.
↑ Yong Woo on Twitter. (2015-08-31).
↑ Hearthside Chat - You're Better Than You Think!. (2014-09-18).
↑ Zeriyah on Twitter. (2014-09-18).
↑ Hearthpwn.com - Dean Ayala (IksarHS) Discusses Arena and Rogues. (2016-11-25).
↑ Ben Brode on Twitter. (2015-06-08).
↑ A New Way to Play. (2016-02-02).
This page was last edited on 8 April 2019, at 16:56.


One live SCOBY with starter tea. Start making your own kombucha at home!
Pro-bacteria found: Acetobacter xylinum, xylinoides, aceti, pasteurianus, Bacterium gluconicum, and yeasts Schizosaccharomyces pombe, Kloeckera apiculata, Saccharomycodes ludwigii, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Zygosaccharomyces bailii, Brettanomyces bruxellensis, lambicus, custersii, and Pichia.


Your family of eight will enjoy your camping trips when you choose this Wildwood X-Lite 261BHXL travel trailer. There is plenty of sleeping space throughout from the rear double bunk beds which sleep four people to the sofa, the booth dinette, and the front bedroom with a queen bed, wardrobes on either side, and a shelf above it. A few key features outside include the pass through storage area as well as the 12' awning which provides plenty of shade and is a great gathering spot for your family in the evening. You can also choose to add the optional camp kitchen and more!
When you are ready for some time away from home, but are looking to enjoy comforts from home, then choose a Wildwood X-Lite travel trailer! These models are ideal for any camping excursion and for any family - from the experienced camping couple to the family with multiple kids - there is a trailer for you! Along the exterior you will find an one-piece, full walk-on seamless roof backed by a 12-year warranty and pass-through storage for all of your camping gear, plus a cold crack and mildew resistant vinyl patio awning and two exterior speakers to crank up the tunes. Inside there is a 4.3 cu. ft. electric refrigerator, a radio with CD player, an attractive kitchen backsplash, extra large kitchen overhead cabinets, and mini blinds for added privacy. Unleash your inner "wild" with a Wildwood X-Lite travel trailer!


text:
VR Scout / XR News
BBC Drops First Trailer For Interactive Doctor Who VR Animation
by xradmin · April 15, 2019
Ride shotgun with an explosive ball of gas in this 13-minute immersive adventure.
This past February it was announced that Doctor Who: The Runaway — a brand new Doctor Who-inspired interactive VR animation — would be making its way to the Tribeca Film Festival's Immersive Arcade in NYC, treating festival-goers to an original sci-fi adventure featuring the voice of the thirteenth Doctor herself, Jodie Whitacker.
Today, BBC has delivered our first look at the 13-minute interactive journey with an action-packed trailer full of holograms, explosions, and plenty of cataclysmic predictions from a fast-talking Timelord. You know, just your typical Doctor Who shenanigans.
According to a brief synopsis provided by the BBC, players will begin their journey aboard the legendary Tardis after having collided with a glowing ball of explosive "living energy" named Volta.
"You've been in a collision. You wake inside the TARDIS. The Doctor introduces you to the person, or thing, you collided with. He's a strange and magnificent ball of living energy called Volta. Part surly teenager, part bomb, Volta is very unstable. In fact, he's primed to explode. Big time. Unless he can be returned to his home planet, sharpish."
"The problem is, a squad of galactic busybodies has other plans for Volta. Bad ones. Drawn into a frantic chase, you become the Doctor's unlikely assistant as she races against time to get Volta home to his parents. Armed with a sonic screwdriver, it is down to you to help the Doctor as she faces the forces of evil, and teenage angst, in this animated 13-minute VR adventure from the team behind Doctor Who Series 11."
BBC states that Doctor Who: Runaway is an interactive VR experience, although they've yet to provide any information in regards to what players what will be doing throughout their 13-minute rescue mission.
Based on the trailer, however, it appears as though we can expect to be piloting the Tardis at some point in the adventure. Doctor Who: Runaway is set to premiere at the 2019 Tribeca Film Festival Friday, April 26th – Saturday, May 5th in Tribeca, New York. For a full list of dates, check out https://www.tribecafilm.com/immersive.
https://vrscout.com/news/bbc-doctor-who-runaway-trailer/
Tags: BBCDoctor WhoDoctor Who: The RunawayNewsVR Animation
Next story Jack Daniels Turns Their Whiskey Bottle Into An AR Pop-Up Book
Previous story Oculus Quest Needs More Original Content, not Ports
Korean Low Cost Carrier Trials In-Flight Virtual Reality Entertainment
Review: PlanTechtor
Talespin Runway Expands Training Library to Improve Enterprise Learning


NEW YORK, Nov. 15, 2018—The pirate television service known as "BTV" must cease the illegal retransmission of channels, stop selling its BTV set-top box, and pay damages of $6.6 million, according to a recent ruling by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
The BTV set-top box, which illegally delivers a variety of TV channels and programs from India, Pakistan and other countries, is sold for nearly $300 per box with the promise that customers can watch shows and movies 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Rather than obtain the rights for these shows, the developers of the BTV service established a pirate broadcasting network that brazenly captures entire channels (such as Zee, Colors and Sony) and streams them through the BTV set-top box without permission.
"BTV is yet another example of an operation that deceives customers into thinking they are buying a legitimate service when, in fact, it's piracy run rampant," said Jaideep Janakiram of Sony Entertainment.
The entities who own the content (or exclusive rights to the content) that BTV was pirating include Asia TV USA Ltd., MSM Asia Ltd., Star India Private Ltd., Viacom 18 Media Private Limited, ARY Digital USA LLC and DISH Network L.L.C. In an effort to protect their content, the plaintiffs sent several cease-and-desist letters to BTV demanding that it stop illegally airing their content. BTV failed to comply, and the plaintiffs filed a suit in September 2017 for copyright and trademark infringement.
On October 11, the court issued its judgment. In addition to ruling that BTV must pay $6.6 million in damages to the plaintiffs, the court ruled that BTV must immediately and permanently cease transmitting the programming and stop marketing the channels, among other orders.
The court also addressed third parties that provide services enabling BTV's piracy to flourish, ordering them to cease delivering support. The court specifically ruled that retailers must stop selling the BTV set-top box, and that parties providing online services to BTV, such as web hosts, must cease supporting the BTV service. "Not only has the court protected our rights as a content owner, it has held both BTV, and the key players in the broader ecosystem that enable piracy to flourish, accountable for their actions," added Janakiram.
Activities are underway to ensure the court's order is enforced. A copy of the ruling can be found here, and a copy of the original complaint can be found here.