Answer:
First, the artwork was removed because it was made from Otter leather. Ruby whose work was removed alongside others stated that the Alaskan Natives were not the object of the policy because other kinds of items other than fur-bearing animals such as the Otter are also on the prohibited list. The list also comprised bones of rhinos, elephant ivory, etc. The sentiment here is that Etsy is executing this not just to unify their policy into a global one but because of pressure from the Federal government.
The other school which comprises of two institutions (KTOO and Sealaska Heritage Institute) as well as Dan Sullivan believe that the policy is based on erroneous logic and ought to be reversed because marine mammals in the Southeast are not endangered.
Explanation:
I'd say that Etsy ought to review its globalization strategy. It ought to adopt a <em>glocalization</em> strategy instead.
Glocalization is the integration of local considerations into policies and processes. In marketing, for instance, Coca-cola always looks out for content that appeals locally then uses that as a basis for communicating it's message.
In spite of the fact that the world is now a global village, multi-national organizations have seen that local content is valued more than ever before as peoples make very concerted effort to preserve local culture whether it is in music, theatre, food, language, or otherwise. It is understandable that the world over is trying to preserve what remains of nature, in a place where certain animals form the back bone of their local economy and is not endangered, then preserving such a local economy should take the best step for the people and the business not just the best step for the business such as tidying up her internal policies as suggested by Etsy in paragraph 9 of the article.
Instead of an outright ban on the sale of products made from Otter or other marine mammals, they should in conjunction with the Federal government consider creating conservatories and regulating the hunting of the marine mammals so that there is a balance.
Cheers
Answer:
Frank: internal conflict
Mr. Farris: external conflict
Mark: external conflict
Mrs. MacDougal: internal conflict
Explanation:
Franks conflict is internal because he is not upset with his friends for not making it to the party, but rather feels guilty with himself for not saying anything.
Mr. Farris has an external conflict because he had a heated disagreement with another person.
Mark has an external conflict because he has angered his team members by continually missing practice sessions.
Mrs. MacDougal has an internal conflict because she is indecisive regarding her evening plans. This only has to do with her and not other people.
If you mean how does use of questions contribute to the development of ideas in general, then it makes the raiders think as they read.
The people at the party. All of the famous people and just random attendees that have many personalities and interesting characteristics
Answer:
The oxymoron creates a contradictory mood, emphasizing the confused nature of love.
Explanation:
The oxymoron is a figure of speech that allows to present a paradox in the text, that is, the oxymoron presents in the same sentence, two contrary information, but that are complemented in some way.
In the text presented above, the oxymoron is seen in the lines "the sweetest honey / Is loathsome in his own deliciousness". With this sentence, the author creates a contradictory mood, but presents a characteristic love as something confused, but pleasurable.
