brl.com Report : Visit Site

Technical data of the brl.com

Geo IP provides you such as latitude, longitude and ISP (Internet Service Provider) etc. informations. Our GeoIP service found where is host brl.com. Currently, hosted in United States and its service provider is Network Solutions LLC .

the related websites

brl.ac.uk cisx.com bloomberg.com brldata.com exchangerates.org.uk tocris.com lifetechnologies.com betaarchive.com tripadvisor.co.uk boreme.com vichar.bhadas4media.com 

HTTP Header Analysis

HTTP Header information is a part of HTTP protocol that a user's browser sends to called Apache/2.4 containing the details of what the browser wants and will accept back from the web server.

DNS

HtmlToText

asymmetric leadership search primary menu skip to content boxer research limited brl publications links privacy policy toolsets critik pan projective analysis tools workbook processes search for: centre vs edge , ethical challenge working on the edges august 8, 2017 philipjboxer leave a comment by philip boxer the following set of notes emerged from a conversation with sandy henderson about the forensic approach – an approach to understanding and beginning to address ‘systemic bias’. [1] implicit in the way a person speaks about what is going on (wigo) is a way of framing meaning. the frame contains wigo for the speaker in the sense of providing a way of giving meaning to their experience of wigo. [2] the wigo being contained needs to be distinguished here from the way wigo is held , which means to limit the granularity and detail of the phenomena that need containing. [3] this way of framing rests on implicit assumptions that govern its reasoning. the assumptions implicit within a frame can be reinforced by a cycle of process-outcome-consequence (a process undertaken to achieve an outcome has consequences that reinforce the frame’s way of containing wigo). outcomes are about what happens while consequences are about how those outcomes impact on the interests of those invested in the frame’s outcomes. the frame can be disrupted by a consequence that cannot be contained by the frame’s implicit assumptions. this disruptive consequence can ‘flip’ the person out of the frame into an ‘other’ frame resting on different implicit assumptions with its own reinforcing p-o-c cycle that is able to contain the disruptive consequence but in which interests are invested differently. a dilemma emerges if the ‘other’ frame also encounters disrupting consequences such that the person is ‘flipped’ back to the p-o-c cycle under the previous frame, giving rise potentially to an oscillation between two frames. when this happens, this oscillation takes place around a ‘gap’ representing the aspects of wigo that neither frame is able to contain. any frame is vulnerable to the possibility of being disrupted by ‘flipping’ outcome-consequences. there are thus always ‘other’ frames possible and different kinds of dilemma, therefore, each revealing gaps representing different kinds of impossibility. the way this ‘gap’ is encountered (and the impossibility that it represents to either frame) will be symptomatic of the way each frame is being held in order to limit the disrupting consequences encountered by each of their p-o-c cycles. holding frames in a way that limits disrupting consequences creates a ‘systemic bias’ [4] that is manifested in three ways: the first is by a flight to the personal aka scapegoating – an explanation in terms of individuals’ responsibility that leaves the frames themselves unacknowledged. the second is by turning a blind eye to granularity and detail that would make disrupting consequences apparent by insisting on an existing way of holding frames. the third is by the disclusion of the interests of persons identified with consequences that would disrupt existing ways of holding and containing frames. to disclude is to exclude the interests of a person from consideration and dismiss as irrelevant any granularity and detail of wigo relating to those ‘other’ interests that could give rise to disrupting consequences. [5] all of these manifestations of systemic bias provoke hostility and mistrust and create injustice for those affected. an injustice here means that interests are being served at others’ expense that are in some way unnecessary, excessive and/or unjustifiable. any challenge that is permitted to existing ways of holding frames could give rise to new frames and new kinds of gap. if a challenge is not permitted (intentionally or otherwise), the resulting injustice can be approached as a (serial) ‘murder’ of innovations – the potential frames whose creation is thereby prevented. [6] such murders may be ‘investigated’ by treating as ‘crime scenes’ the p-o-c cycles in which the injustices arose and identifying the means, opportunity and motive through which the ‘murders’ took place. probable cause aka ‘reasonable grounds’ for the systemic bias may be established by identifying the means, opportunity and motive for the scapegoating, turning a blind eye or disclusion. motive may be established through establishing the particular interests being served by the existing ways of holding frames. the systemic nature of the ‘murders’ may then be identified with those standing to benefit from them who have the means and opportunity. for ‘probable cause’ to be established, however, we need ‘detectives’ – persons whose personal valency leads them to sense the injustices and to have the drive to do the forensic work involved. [7] the intention behind establishing ‘probable cause’ is, of course, a successful ‘prosecution’ that changes the repeated behaviors towards ‘others’. the exploration of a situation felt to be problematic and/or unjust in some way – and an individual’s valency for recognising it – can be achieved through a way of using the ‘plus-one’ process. this sets out to look beyond the ‘truth’ of an individual’s narrative of a situation in order to uncover the dilemma they are experiencing in the situation, and to explore the nature of the gap between its frames with its underlying impossibility. this plus-one process involves three people with a fourth person in a witness role . the plus-one process itself starts with a narrating of a situation by a speaker (1) to a listener (2) in the presence of a person in the plus-one role (3). the following three stages are repeated three times as the three people rotate around these three roles. the person in the witness role bears witness to the whole process of rotating roles. stage 1 involves, in the first iteration, the articulation of the narrative about the situation experienced as problematic/unjust from the speaker’s perspective. subsequent stage 1 narratives are in each case of a situation experienced by the speaker that shows the meaning of the metaphor they previously identified from their plus-one role. stage 2 involves clarification of the narrative by the listener. stage 3 is the production of a metaphor by the ‘plus-one’ based on a counter-transferential ‘hunch’ about the narrative framing within which the narrative unfolded as it emerged from the speaking-and-listening. the metaphor represents the plus-one’s sense of the shape of the speaker’s relation to the situation that has emerged. the metaphor derives from the feelings evoked in the plus-one by the speaker’s articulation of the narrative and its subsequent clarification by the listener. the witness will subsequently use the three metaphors that emerge from the plus-one process to hypothesise an ‘other side’ of the original narrative articulated by the speaker as a first step in formulating the gap between the two frames and the underlying impossibility it represents. having elaborated this ‘other side’ as an alternative p-o-c cycle narrating of the original situation, it needs to be validated by relating the ‘flipping’ consequences in each frame back to the original narrative and defining the oscillation between them. the witness’s final step is then to hypothesise the nature of the gap between the frames and the underlying impossibility it represents. two questions then arise that define the focus of a lacanese parallel process [8] : (i) what is it about the way this dilemma is being held that sets it up in this way; and (ii) what is the nature of the original speaker’s valency for this way of its being ‘set up’. [9] notes [1] ‘systemic bias’ is apparent, for example, in institutional racism. i have written about ‘systemic bias’ in a number of its guises. in its extreme forms it edges over into being ‘white collar crime’. the forensic rule in these kinds of case is ‘to follow the money’: “defences against innovation: the conservation o

URL analysis for brl.com

http://www.asymmetricleadership.com/2007/07/dilemmas-as-drivers-of-change/
https://www.asymmetricleadership.com/2014/08/on-stratification/
https://www.asymmetricleadership.com/#content
https://www.asymmetricleadership.com/category/architecture/
https://www.asymmetricleadership.com/2005/11/asymmetric-demand/
https://www.asymmetricleadership.com/category/effects-ladder/
https://www.asymmetricleadership.com/2006/01/3-asymmetries/
http://www.asymmetricleadership.com/2013/10/what-makes-leadership-asymmetric/
https://www.asymmetricleadership.com/2016/09/so-you-say-you-want-to-put-your-clients-first/
https://www.asymmetricleadership.com/category/centre-vs-edge/
https://www.asymmetricleadership.com/2016/09/demand-asymmetry-defining-demand-situations-and-effects-ladders/
https://www.asymmetricleadership.com/2012/11/timespan-of-discretion/
https://www.asymmetricleadership.com/2012/04/evaluating-platform-architectures-within-ecosystems-modeling-the-suppliers-relation-to-indirect-value/
https://www.asymmetricleadership.com/2006/01/3-agilities/
https://www.asymmetricleadership.com/2011/03/primary-risk/

Whois Information

Whois is a protocol that is access to registering information. You can reach when the website was registered, when it will be expire, what is contact details of the site with the following informations. In a nutshell, it includes these informations;

Domain Name: BRL.COM
Registry Domain ID: 1709500_DOMAIN_COM-VRSN
Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.networksolutions.com
Registrar URL: http://networksolutions.com
Updated Date: 2017-03-05T18:03:15Z
Creation Date: 1995-07-26T04:00:00Z
Registrar Registration Expiration Date: 2019-07-25T04:00:00Z
Registrar: NETWORK SOLUTIONS, LLC.
Registrar IANA ID: 2
Registrar Abuse Contact Email: [email protected]
Registrar Abuse Contact Phone: +1.8003337680
Reseller:
Domain Status: clientTransferProhibited https://icann.org/epp#clientTransferProhibited
Registry Registrant ID:
Registrant Name: PERFECT PRIVACY, LLC
Registrant Organization:
Registrant Street: 12808 Gran Bay Parkway West
Registrant City: Jacksonville
Registrant State/Province: FL
Registrant Postal Code: 32258
Registrant Country: US
Registrant Phone: +1.5707088780
Registrant Phone Ext:
Registrant Fax:
Registrant Fax Ext:
Registrant Email: [email protected]
Registry Admin ID:
Admin Name: PERFECT PRIVACY, LLC
Admin Organization:
Admin Street: 12808 Gran Bay Parkway West
Admin City: Jacksonville
Admin State/Province: FL
Admin Postal Code: 32258
Admin Country: US
Admin Phone: +1.5707088780
Admin Phone Ext:
Admin Fax:
Admin Fax Ext:
Admin Email: [email protected]
Registry Tech ID:
Tech Name: PERFECT PRIVACY, LLC
Tech Organization:
Tech Street: 12808 Gran Bay Parkway West
Tech City: Jacksonville
Tech State/Province: FL
Tech Postal Code: 32258
Tech Country: US
Tech Phone: +1.5707088780
Tech Phone Ext:
Tech Fax:
Tech Fax Ext:
Tech Email: [email protected]
Name Server: NS51.WORLDNIC.COM
Name Server: NS52.WORLDNIC.COM
DNSSEC: Unsigned
URL of the ICANN WHOIS Data Problem Reporting System: http://wdprs.internic.net/
>>> Last update of WHOIS database: 2017-07-08T04:33:52Z <<<


This listing is a Network Solutions Private Registration. Mail
correspondence to this address must be sent via USPS Express Mail(TM) or
USPS Certified Mail(R); all other mail will not be processed. Be sure to
include the registrant's domain name in the address.

The data in Networksolutions.com's WHOIS database is provided to you by
Networksolutions.com for information purposes only, that is, to assist you in
obtaining information about or related to a domain name registration
record. Networksolutions.com makes this information available "as is," and
does not guarantee its accuracy. By submitting a WHOIS query, you
agree that you will use this data only for lawful purposes and that,
under no circumstances will you use this data to: (1) allow, enable,
or otherwise support the transmission of mass unsolicited, commercial
advertising or solicitations via direct mail, electronic mail, or by
telephone; or (2) enable high volume, automated, electronic processes
that apply to Networksolutions.com (or its systems). The compilation,
repackaging, dissemination or other use of this data is expressly
prohibited without the prior written consent of Networksolutions.com.
Networksolutions.com reserves the right to modify these terms at any time.
By submitting this query, you agree to abide by these terms.

For more information on Whois status codes, please visit
https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/epp-status-codes-2014-06-16-en.


  REGISTRAR NETWORK SOLUTIONS, LLC.

  REFERRER http://networksolutions.com

SERVERS

  SERVER com.whois-servers.net

  ARGS domain =brl.com

  PORT 43

  SERVER whois.networksolutions.com

  ARGS brl.com

  PORT 43

  TYPE domain

DOMAIN

  NAME brl.com

NSERVER

  NS51.WORLDNIC.COM 207.204.40.126

  NS52.WORLDNIC.COM 207.204.21.126

STATUS
clientTransferProhibited https://icann.org/epp#clientTransferProhibited

  CHANGED 2011-03-28

  CREATED 1995-07-26

  EXPIRES 2019-07-25

  REGISTERED yes

Mistakes

The following list shows you to spelling mistakes possible of the internet users for the website searched .