Delineation Puns

And by philosophy I mean the non-material deductions/leanings/beliefs inherent to their own particular school of thought, as in Neoplatonism, Stoicism, Nihilism, etc.

I usually just spectate on this Reddit, but I’ve decided to make my first post. My company really needs a few hard working people to join our wetland delineation / ecology team in Georgia. It’s a great opportunity, so message me if you’d like to hear more about it.

So we use Intrado + our CER. Our CER is using DIDs for various area code per region. Each DID is used to associate with Intrado's records. One county within an area code unfortunately is somehow split between AT&T/Intrado and Lumens from what i understand. The call goes through the PRI fine and even return calls are successful, but it seems the record association is absent for the local PSAP - they're not seeing anything. The call will apparently hit a nearby PSAP within the area code and will need to be forwarded to the correct PSAP. Has anyone ever dealt with this? Advice?

Hello all,

I was wondering what proper definition or meaning would you use to describe delineation in GIS?

In other words,

PE / CE will essentially be the same equipment.

CE will be housed in it's own VRF and I would like to have that VRF communicate with another VRF for the same customer in a different DC.

I am currently route-leaking all subnets into the main routing table and then route-leaking the other direction at the other data center.

As you can tell, this is....not scaleable and a PITA management wise.

I thought I could use MPLS between my cores and get around any subnet overlap, etc but now i'm realizing I might have a problem?

Does anyone know what the best 100% online course is for getting the wetland certification? I’m trying to expand my working skill set to get into the actual job I want. I’m planning to take storm water management and soil erosion certifications as well. Any info would be appreciated!

Socialists/communists define private property as property which is involved in generating wealth, i.e. a factory, farmland etc, and personal property as other non-productive possessions e.g. your house, your bed etc.

The first problem is that in this day and age the line between which property is private and personal according to this definition is incredibly blurred. For instance, I have used the laptop that I am writing on now both as personal property for the purposes of leisure and recreation, and for generating wealth through my side-job as a freelance journalist. Thus, the same piece of property can become different things depending on how it is used by the same person at different times. This is a question which I believe socialists ultimately have no answer to, as you can't easily compel people not to use their laptop to generate wealth for themselves without extreme government tyranny.

The second and far more significant issue is that making a distinction between these two forms of property, and consequentially arguing that any wealth-creating property should be transferred into common ownership, greatly disincentivises people from putting their property to productive use, because in doing so they will lose exclusive control over it.

Take a landowner who has a large plot of land upon which he has built himself a house, with a great deal of extra land left over. He could either turn this land into a farm and hire workers to help him produce food for people, or he could turn it into some frivolous personal amenity like a pool for instance. Under socialism, what incentive does the landowner have to put his land to productive use given he will immediately lose control over that land when he does so?

And since many socialists will claim that land ownership won't be a thing under their model, that's fine, we can substitute any piece of property which could hypothetically be used for both personal and so-called "private" reasons.

The far deeper problem with the socialist conceptualisation of "personal property" is indeed that the rights that they give "personal property" owners do not entail the rights of a property owner at all. If you give me a piece of property and tell me "you can do x y and z with this item but not a b and c or else I'll take it from you", you haven't made me the sole owner of this item, you've simply made me the temporary custodian of it until I do something with it which you find undesirable, making you the true property ow

Hey guys

I got a call from a commercial broker telling me that there was an interested party for my property, and if I would be willing to do a one party listing, he sent me a contract to sign but it was for about half the value so I didn't bite.

My question is why would someone want my 3 acre Commercial property with a small strip mall on it to do a wetland delineation ?

What is a Wetland delineation is, how/why its used in Commercial property, and is it needed.

There is a large parcel of commercial land next to me for sale, could that have anything to do with it.

Any thoughts ??

Oh and their one party contract runs until 04/22

Here's a snippet from his last email to me below.

"

// This group is under the gun. They need to get a wetland delineation done in October. Rather than spending time and money on an appraisal why don’t you throw them a number that makes sense for you to sell. I will verbalize it and if it doesn’t make sense for their plans then we can all move on. Does that work? //

Hi, I am trying to delineate catchments to catchbasins and pipe inlets for stormwater network in a city.

I got the basic process down with ArcHydro Documentation, but I am struggling to get a good representation at roads. Kerbs are poorly captured (50cm dtm). Buildings are crossed as well even after I flattened the DTM using their footprint.

What are my options to make the results better?

I hope the title isn’t too confusing but my question is; why is Pluto and Saturn listed to be dominant when I use astro.com natal wheel in Astrodienst Style but in the Pullen/delineation Saturn and Neptune is the top 3 power rank (Mars is listed 3)? Is this two different calculations going on or am I just crazy lol

Hi all, I found a 2003 Wetland Delineation and Management Training Manuel/Workbook by Richard Chinn Environmental Training Inc. from a former intern in my cubical. I was wondering how much of it would still be relevant with all the advances/updates in GIS, EPA, and NEPA since then. Thank you!

Edit: I am also an intern and this is in Florida

Are there any field tech recommendations for wetland delineations?

I historically used an android tablet (Samsung galaxy - idk which one) coupled with a bad elf.

I used an apple ipad once, but the battery died awfully quickly. It seems the android tablet was also just tougher in general.

Bad elf has been tricky. I know a few people have complaints, but I learned to use it pretty well. Any bluetooth couplers that you recommend?

any other field tech you recommend would be appreciated too!

Thanks in advance!

Alright so I'm working my way through a few LSAT prep books and I've come across this description of Necessary and Sufficient Conditions and while I THINK I understand it there is just something about this example of lightning strikes as sufficient and an ignition source as necessary that seems confusing. Is this just because the example mentions an ignition source as necessary and then provides a TYPE of ignition source as sufficient? Further, and MOST CONFUSING, they say "being a woman" is not a sufficient condition for being pregnant because "other conditions must also be present" but isnt this reasoning that would mean a lightning strike WOULDNT also be a sufficient cause, because you need fuel and sufficient oxygen (ie not enough rain to put the fire out immediately)?! It seems like the more I analyze these examples in tandem with online examples I just get more confused.

Is this just a badly written example in my book or am I missing/overthinking something? confusing conditions

Hi guys!

According to Anthony Louis and his SR book, when the native’s ascendant falls in the natal 1st house/natal Ascendant it generally is an ok time and can be a year that would bring the “natal promise” to fruition.

According to Ciro Discepolo, If you see that your annual ascendant will fall onto the natal one - YOU MUST GET OUT NOW. Bad. Horrible. Dangerous etc

In general, other Ciro’s guidelines have been working for me quite well. However, I have never yet had a SR with annual ASC on the natal one.

What has been your experience with such combination?

A Delineation is a line drawn. A line divides one side from another, distinguishing between This / That as reference points, known only by contrast with each other.

Everything that follows relies on this axiomatic assumption: there are no lines to start with, hence, there are no reference points to start with.

The first Delineation between I / Other distinguishes "I" as a reference point, known only by contrast to "Other".

Because there are no reference points to start with, there is no basis to maintain the distinction of "I".

Thus, in order to distinguish "I", new reference points must be made which "I" will refer to.

This is done through further Delineations, the most basic of which is Subject / Object (or Knower / Known), where "I" piggy-backs off the reference point "Subject".

Again, because there are no reference points to start with, there are no Objects by which to contrast a Subject. Thus, new reference points must be made for said Objects.

Thus Delineations are drawn between all manner of Objects, between This / That, of every shape, size, color; such as Body / Surroundings, Edible / Inedible, Friend / Foe, Mine / Yours, Mind / Matter, Past / Future, etc., etc.; reference points referring to reference points, ad infinitum. In short, the entirety of the space-time-bound, self-world-complex is included in this constellation of self-referring reference points.

On the basis of this structure, a modicum of stability for the distinction of "I" can be (somewhat) established, and consequently, for the stability of "Other", or "World".

The sheer momentum that drives this tenuous structure is called Karma (2NT).

The burden of maintaining this is called Clinging, and Clinging is Stressful (1NT).

To let go of that burden is Relief (3NT).

Letting go is facilitated by Insight into the Karmic momentum of Delineation (plus other auxiliary supports for Insight) (4NT).

Insight itself is a Delineation between Delineations / Non-Delineation, a special type of Delineation that enables dis-embedding from the burdensome Clinging to that Karmic process.

By contrasting Delineations with a novel alternative, Non-Delineation, the arbitrariness of Delineations can be recognized, and therein dis-embedded from.

As for the method of Insight (4NT), setting aside the auxiliary supports (themselves based on Delineations), there are a few approaches, which vary based on the level of explicit engagement with Delineation.

The barebones approach could be described as

What do you do if a plant lacks a indicator status (as defined by the USACE) when conducting a wetland delineation?

Thanks in advance!