Order Cheap Ativan Online - Discount Online Pharmacy

Got an email the other day from one of my blog readers (no, not you, Mom) asking how my paper at the ICA was received. My first reaction was: why don't you put that question in a comment on the blog instead of sending an email, lazy reader? My second reaction was: thank you, reader, that's a good question. My previous post about my ICA paper was perhaps somewhat clouded by the bitter bile of rejection (Can bile form a cloud? Well it's bitter, anyway). So yeah - I presented in a session on Monday (i.e. the last day of the conference), which is usually the graveyard shift, everybody is tired and/or getting ready to go home (or gone already). Still, it was the morning session, so the audience was decent (there were two other presenters, so the punters were presumably not there just on my account). I had mistimed my presentation so had to cut it a bit short, but I still got to the key points. No-one was snoring during the presentation. The commentator had some good points: it's all very well in theory, but how will it stand up to empirical testing? Remains to be seen. He also liked the fact that I emphasized that the relationship between occupational and organizational professionalism was not antagonistic but rather characterized by constant negotiation (read my paper if you want to find out about the occupational/organizational professionalism distinction). I got some good questions and comments from the floor, including one very enthusiastic response saying that my theoretical perspective represented a fresh start for the entire field of journalism studies. Ego boost! Exaggerated, but still. Ego boost! Some people have emailed me afterwards and asked for copies of the paper, including the references this time. I didn't realize that the paper submission software ICA uses deletes references added with reference management software, so the paper I submitted did not have any references in it. Neither the commentator nor anyone in the audience commented on this at the time. Hmm... maybe they were so positive because they didn't read my paper?