COC
A code of conduct (CoC) is a document establishing behavioral guidelines and enforcement procedures for participants in communities, particularly prevalent in open-source software projects and online forums.[1] These codes typically emphasize respect, inclusivity, and mechanisms for reporting perceived violations, aiming to create environments conducive to collaboration.[2] Widely adopted templates like the Contributor Covenant have been implemented in thousands of repositories on platforms such as GitHub, influencing major initiatives including the Linux kernel mailing lists since 2018. Proponents credit CoCs with reducing harassment and broadening participation, though empirical evidence on their causal impact remains limited and contested, with some studies suggesting minimal measurable improvements in community health metrics.[3] The implementation of CoCs has generated substantial controversy, particularly regarding enforcement discretion and potential for ideological overreach, as seen in high-profile cases like the 2024 restriction of kernel developer Kent Overstreet's participation by the Linux Foundation's Technical Advisory Board over conduct disputes.[4] Critics argue that vague standards enable subjective policing that prioritizes political conformity over technical merit, a view amplified in technical communities wary of external pressures from advocacy groups.[5] Mainstream coverage often frames CoCs as unalloyed progress toward equity, yet this overlooks dissenting analyses from developers highlighting risks of factional capture in merit-based domains.[3]General and Legal Terms
Chain of Command
The chain of command refers to the formal hierarchical line of authority and accountability within an organization, extending from the highest leadership to the lowest operational levels, where each individual reports to a single superior to facilitate clear direction and execution of orders.[6][7] This structure ensures that instructions flow downward efficiently while information and feedback ascend, minimizing confusion and overlapping responsibilities.[8] Historically rooted in ancient military practices, the chain of command evolved from Roman legions and Greek phalanxes, where defined ranks enabled coordinated action in large formations, and persisted through modern professional armies to standardize authority amid complex operations.[9] In contemporary contexts, it underpins doctrines like unity of command, which posits that a single commander should direct forces toward a common objective to avoid divided efforts, though this principle adapts to limits on span of control—typically 3-7 direct subordinates—necessitating layered hierarchies for scalability.[10][11] In military organizations, adherence to the chain of command is critical for operational cohesion, as it enforces discipline, rapid decision-making, and accountability; for instance, U.S. Army Regulation 600-20 outlines command policies that mandate respect for this structure to prevent unauthorized actions or disruptions.[12] Violations, such as bypassing superiors, can undermine trust and lead to inefficiencies, as evidenced in analyses of historical campaigns where fractured chains contributed to failures.[9] Legally, the chain imposes responsibilities on commanders, including under doctrines of command responsibility in international law, where superiors may face liability for subordinates' war crimes if they knew or should have known of misconduct and failed to intervene, as codified in frameworks like the U.S. Uniform Code of Military Justice.[13] Beyond the military, the chain of command applies to civilian enterprises, government agencies, and corporations, promoting accountability by delineating reporting lines; for example, in business settings, it clarifies who approves decisions, reducing errors in execution while fostering development of junior leaders through delegated authority.[8][14] In legal terms for non-military contexts, it influences employment law by establishing protocols for grievance reporting and supervisory oversight, potentially shielding organizations from liability if chains are followed in investigations of misconduct, though courts may scrutinize rigidity that impedes whistleblowing or ethical reporting.[15] Critics argue that overly rigid chains can stifle innovation or delay responses in dynamic environments, prompting hybrid models that balance hierarchy with lateral communication, yet empirical studies affirm its foundational role in scaling large entities effectively.[9][16]Chain of Custody
Chain of custody refers to the chronological documentation tracking the handling, transfer, storage, and analysis of physical or digital evidence from initial collection until its presentation in court, ensuring its authenticity and integrity.[17][18] This process records each individual who has physical possession of the evidence, the dates and times of transfers, and the locations involved, forming a verifiable paper trail or digital log.[19] In forensic and legal contexts, it applies to items such as biological samples, documents, weapons, or electronic data seized during investigations.[20] The primary purpose of maintaining a chain of custody is to demonstrate a reasonable probability that the evidence has not been altered, contaminated, or tampered with, thereby upholding its reliability for judicial proceedings.[20] Courts require proof of an unbroken chain to authenticate evidence, as any gaps—such as undocumented handoffs or improper storage—can lead to challenges during pretrial motions or trial, potentially rendering the evidence inadmissible.[17] For instance, in criminal cases, defense attorneys may move to suppress evidence if the prosecution cannot account for its custody history, emphasizing the chain's role in preserving due process and evidentiary standards.[21] Standard procedures for establishing and maintaining chain of custody include initial collection by authorized personnel, who label items with unique identifiers, seals, and signatures; secure packaging to prevent degradation; and logging transfers via forms that detail the releaser, receiver, condition of the item, and purpose of handling (e.g., transport to a lab for analysis).[19] During analysis, forensic experts document their actions without breaking the seal unnecessarily, and all personnel must sign for receipt and release, often using tamper-evident containers or electronic tracking systems for high-volume or digital evidence.[18] In government protocols, such as those from the National Institute of Justice, emphasis is placed on minimizing handlers to reduce risk, with dual verification for critical transfers.[17] Breaches in the chain, such as lost documentation or unauthorized access, undermine evidence credibility and can result in acquittals or mistrials, as seen in cases where courts exclude testimony reliant on compromised samples.[21] Jurisdictional variations exist; for example, U.S. federal rules under Federal Rules of Evidence Rule 901 require authentication through testimony or records showing continuous custody, while state laws may impose stricter documentation for biological evidence under DNA handling statutes like 34 U.S.C. § 40702.[17] Modern adaptations incorporate digital tools, like blockchain for immutable logs, to address challenges with volatile electronic evidence, though traditional paper forms remain foundational in many protocols.[18]Code of Conduct
A code of conduct is a set of guidelines and principles that outline expected behaviors, ethical standards, and responsibilities for individuals within an organization, aiming to foster integrity and compliance with laws.[22] It serves to guide decision-making in various situations, deterring wrongdoing while promoting honest and ethical practices among employees and stakeholders.[23] [24] Formalized organizational codes of conduct emerged prominently in the 1980s, initially emphasizing fair business practices, with later expansions to address environmental obligations, product quality, and broader sustainability concerns by the early 2000s.[25] Profession-specific ethical codes, however, have existed for decades across fields like law and medicine to articulate standards for conscientious practice.[26] Key components typically include an introductory message from leadership setting the tone, articulation of core organizational values and mission, and detailed policies on compliance with laws, conflicts of interest, confidentiality, anti-bribery measures, and respectful workplace interactions.[27] [28] Reporting mechanisms for violations, such as anonymous hotlines, are standard to enable detection and resolution.[29] Enforcement relies on regular communication, mandatory training, consistent monitoring, and graduated consequences for breaches, ranging from warnings to termination or legal action, as seen in corporate examples where violations like harassment or fraud trigger investigations and sanctions.[30] [31] Effective implementation requires leadership commitment to model adherence, ensuring the code functions beyond mere documentation to shape actual behavior and mitigate risks like regulatory non-compliance.[32]Certificate of Conformity
A Certificate of Conformity (CoC) is a formal document issued by a manufacturer, supplier, or authorized third party attesting that a product, service, or deliverable meets specified technical standards, regulatory requirements, or contractual specifications.[33][34] It serves as evidence of compliance without necessarily implying independent testing, distinguishing it from certificates backed by third-party verification.[35] The primary purpose of a CoC is to facilitate trade, importation, and market access by demonstrating adherence to safety, quality, environmental, or performance criteria, thereby reducing risks for buyers and regulators.[36] In international commerce, it is often required for customs clearance, especially for goods entering markets with harmonized standards, such as the European Union or the United States.[37] For instance, in vehicle manufacturing, a CoC confirms that a model complies with type-approval directives, enabling free movement within the EU single market.[38] Issuance typically involves the certifying entity reviewing internal records, test data, or production processes to affirm conformity, with the document including details like product identification, applicable standards, date of issuance, and issuer's signature or seal.[39] In the U.S., under the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), a General Certificate of Conformity (GCC) is mandatory for certain consumer products, citing specific safety rules and referencing test reports or exemptions.[40] Requirements may vary: for low-risk items, a manufacturer's self-declaration suffices, while higher-risk products demand notified body involvement.[41] In government procurement, such as U.S. federal contracts, a CoC may accompany shipments in lieu of source inspection, provided the contractor maintains supporting evidence of conformance.[42] Failure to provide a valid CoC can result in shipment rejection, penalties, or import bans, underscoring its role in enforcing accountability across supply chains.[43] While CoCs promote efficiency, their reliability depends on the issuer's diligence, as self-certification lacks external audit in many cases.[33]Medical and Biological Terms
Combined Oral Contraceptive
Combined oral contraceptives (COCs) are hormonal medications taken daily by mouth to prevent pregnancy, consisting of synthetic estrogen (typically ethinylestradiol) and progestin in fixed or varying doses across a 21- to 28-day cycle, followed by placebo pills or no pills to allow withdrawal bleeding.[44] They differ from progestin-only pills by including both hormones to suppress ovulation more reliably and regulate menstrual cycles.[45] The development of COCs began in the 1950s, with researchers Gregory Pincus and John Rock testing synthetic progestins for contraceptive effects, leading to the FDA approval of Enovid in 1960, which contained 9.85 mg norethynodrel and 150 μg mestranol.[46] Early formulations used higher estrogen doses (up to 150 μg), contributing to side effects, but doses were reduced over decades to 20-35 μg ethinylestradiol by the 1980s, improving safety profiles while maintaining efficacy.[47] COCs primarily prevent conception by inhibiting ovulation through suppression of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and luteinizing hormone (LH) surges, thickening cervical mucus to impede sperm penetration, and thinning the endometrial lining to reduce implantation likelihood.[44] These effects are reversible upon discontinuation, with fertility typically returning within 1-3 months, though prolonged use may delay resumption in some users.[48] With perfect use, COCs have a failure rate of 0.3 pregnancies per 100 women-years, but typical use yields 7-9% due to missed pills or inconsistent timing.[44][49] The CDC classifies COCs as highly effective reversible contraception, with effectiveness comparable to long-acting methods when adherence is maintained, though user error accounts for most failures.[50] Common side effects include nausea, breast tenderness, and breakthrough bleeding, often resolving after 3 months of use.[45] More serious risks involve venous thromboembolism (VTE), with COCs increasing incidence 3- to 4-fold over non-users (7-10 events per 10,000 women-years), varying by progestin type—desogestrel and drospirenone confer higher risks than levonorgestrel—and estrogen dose, with third- and fourth-generation pills showing relative risks up to 1.5-2 times higher than second-generation.[51][45] Meta-analyses confirm this dose- and formulation-dependent elevation, absolute risk remaining low in healthy young women but amplified in smokers, those over 35, or with thrombophilias.[52] Regarding cancer, current or recent COC use associates with a modest increase in breast cancer risk (relative risk 1.2-1.24), which normalizes 10 years post-discontinuation, while long-term use (5+ years) reduces ovarian cancer risk by 30-50% and endometrial cancer by 50%, benefits persisting 20-30 years after cessation.[53][54] No consistent link exists to cervical cancer beyond confounding by sexual behavior, and colorectal cancer risk decreases with prolonged use.[54] Observational data suggest COCs may elevate risks of depression, anxiety, and eating disorders compared to non-users, with odds ratios around 1.2-1.8 in some cohorts, though causality remains debated due to confounding factors like pre-existing conditions.[55] Cardiovascular effects include slight blood pressure increases (3-5 mmHg systolic), more pronounced with higher estrogen doses, potentially accelerating hypertension in predisposed women.[56] Non-contraceptive benefits encompass reduced menstrual pain, heavy bleeding, and anemia; lower incidence of benign breast disease, ovarian cysts, and pelvic inflammatory disease; and management of acne, hirsutism, and endometriosis symptoms via hormonal regulation.[48][53] Contraindications include history of VTE, stroke, breast cancer, uncontrolled hypertension, migraine with aura, smoking over age 35, and liver disease, per CDC guidelines, as these amplify thrombotic or neoplastic risks.[57] Selection of progestin type influences risk-benefit profiles, with evidence favoring lower-risk formulations like levonorgestrel for women with cardiovascular concerns.[58]Calcifying Odontogenic Cyst
The calcifying odontogenic cyst (COC), first described by Gorlin et al. in 1962, is a benign developmental lesion arising from odontogenic epithelium, characterized by a thin fibrous wall lined by ameloblastoma-like epithelium with ghost cells that undergo calcification.[59] It represents part of a spectrum that includes cystic, neoplastic, and rarely infiltrative variants, though most cases behave as simple cysts without aggressive potential.[59] Genetic analysis reveals CTNNB1 mutations in approximately 91% of cases, leading to nuclear beta-catenin accumulation that drives epithelial proliferation and ghost cell formation.[59] COC accounts for 0.3-0.8% of all odontogenic cysts, with a mean patient age of 29-31 years and a broad range from childhood (about one-third of cases) to 92 years.[60] [61] Studies show no consistent gender predilection, though some report a slight male bias (1.3:1 ratio).[61] Lesions predominantly occur in the anterior mandible (65% of cases), often presenting as slowly enlarging, asymptomatic intraosseous swellings with cortical expansion; peripheral (extraosseous) variants are rarer and may cause gingival swelling or pain.[62] [60] Associations include unerupted teeth in 10-32% and odontoma in 20-25% of instances, but symptoms like pain or rapid growth are uncommon unless secondary infection occurs.[60] Radiographically, COC typically appears as a well-circumscribed unilocular radiolucency of variable size, often with focal opacifications from calcifications; multilocular forms are rare.[60] In about one-third of cases, an impacted tooth is superimposed within the lesion.[60] These findings are nonspecific, necessitating histopathological confirmation for diagnosis, as differentials include dentigerous cysts, ameloblastomas, or calcifying epithelial odontogenic tumors.[60] Histologically, the cyst features a nonkeratinized epithelial lining resembling ameloblastoma, with palisaded columnar basal cells, suprabasal stellate reticulum-like areas, and clusters of ghost cells—eosinophilic, anucleate keratinized cells prone to dystrophic calcification.[59] [62] The fibrous capsule may contain dentinoid material from epithelial-mesenchymal induction, though extensive dentinoid is atypical.[62] Calcifications vary from fine dystrophic deposits to larger masses, without significant inflammation unless secondarily infected.[62] Treatment consists of enucleation with curettage to remove the cyst lining completely, sufficient for most cases due to the lesion's well-defined borders; large cysts may require preoperative decompression to facilitate removal and minimize morbidity.[59] [60] If associated with an odontoma or tumor-like proliferation, management addresses the more aggressive component.[59] Prognosis is excellent, with recurrence rates around 5.3% and malignant transformation in only 0.9% of cases, underscoring the need for radiographic follow-up.[61]Scientific and Technical Terms
Cyclic Olefin Copolymer
Cyclic olefin copolymer (COC) is an amorphous thermoplastic polymer synthesized through the addition copolymerization of cyclic monomers, such as norbornene or its derivatives, with linear α-olefins like ethylene.[63] This process yields a random copolymer structure where the cyclic units disrupt chain crystallinity, resulting in optical transparency comparable to glass and low birefringence. The polymerization typically employs metallocene catalysts for high activity and control over comonomer incorporation, though early developments utilized Ziegler-Natta systems.[64] Commercial production began in the 1990s following advances in single-site catalysis pioneered by researchers like Walter Kaminsky, enabling scalable synthesis of materials with tunable properties based on norbornene content, which ranges from 10-50 mol% in most grades.[65] Key physical properties of COC include a glass transition temperature (Tg) that increases with cyclic monomer fraction, spanning 65-180°C, high modulus (2-3 GPa), and low density (1.0-1.02 g/cm³).[66] It exhibits minimal water absorption (<0.01%), superior chemical resistance to acids, bases, and solvents compared to polycarbonate, and biocompatibility suitable for pharmaceutical contact, with no extractables under USP Class VI standards.[67] Thermal stability allows processing via injection molding or extrusion at 200-300°C, while its low dielectric constant (2.2-2.3) supports electronics applications. These attributes stem from the rigid bicyclic structure of norbornene units, which inhibit close chain packing and moisture permeation. COC finds applications in optical components like camera lenses and Blu-ray disc substrates due to its high light transmission (>92% from 400 nm) and low haze.[68] In healthcare, it is used for prefillable syringes, vials, and diagnostic cartridges, leveraging sterility maintenance and gamma-ray resistance up to 50 kGy without significant degradation.[69] Microfluidic devices benefit from its ease of replication in hot embossing and compatibility with PDMS bonding.[66] Packaging films employ COC for barrier properties against oxygen and moisture, often in multilayer structures. Major producers include TOPAS Advanced Polymers (a Celanese subsidiary), offering grades like TOPAS 5013 with 78% light transmission, and Mitsui Chemicals' APEL series, developed via proprietary Ziegler technology.[70][71] Global capacity exceeds 100,000 tons annually as of 2023, driven by demand in electronics and medical sectors.[72] Distinct from cyclic olefin polymers (COP) produced by ring-opening metathesis, COC's addition mechanism avoids double bonds in the backbone, enhancing oxidative stability.[64]Circle of Confusion
The circle of confusion (CoC) in optics refers to the blurred disk formed by the image of a point source of light when it is not perfectly focused on the image plane, such as a camera sensor or film.[73] This occurs because light rays from the point converge either before or after the plane, spreading into a circular patch whose diameter determines the perceived sharpness.[74] The CoC size is inversely related to the degree of defocus: minimal when the point is in focus (approaching the Airy disk from diffraction) and larger with increasing defocus distance.[75] In photography and cinematography, the CoC serves as the threshold for "acceptable sharpness," defining the boundaries of depth of field (DoF)—the range of distances in a scene where points appear sufficiently sharp to the human eye under standard viewing conditions.[76] DoF calculations treat any CoC smaller than this threshold as a point, while larger ones contribute to blur; the threshold is typically set based on visual acuity, such as resolving details at a viewing distance of 25 cm (10 inches) on an enlarged print or screen.[77] For instance, in 35mm full-frame sensors (diagonal approximately 43.3 mm), a common CoC diameter is 0.03 mm, derived from approximations like CoC ≈ sensor diagonal / 1500, though this varies with output size and inspection distance.[75] Smaller formats, like Micro Four Thirds (diagonal 21.6 mm), use proportionally smaller CoC values (e.g., 0.015 mm) to maintain equivalent DoF scaling.[76] The CoC concept originates from geometric optics and aberration theory, where it quantifies tolerances in lens design and focus stacking; in practice, it influences hyperfocal distance formulas, enabling maximum DoF by focusing at H = f² / (N * c) + f, with f as focal length, N as f-number, and c as CoC.[78] Factors enlarging the effective CoC include lens aberrations, diffraction (Airy disk diameter ≈ 2.44 λ N / f), and digital cropping or upscaling, which can reduce DoF by demanding stricter focus criteria.[75] Modern computational photography, such as in smartphone multi-lens systems, simulates variable CoC through post-processing to extend apparent DoF beyond optical limits.[73] Empirical tests confirm that exceeding the CoC threshold visibly degrades resolution, as human visual acuity limits detection of circles below about 1/1730 of the field of view at typical distances.[76]Organizational and Governmental Terms
Continuum of Care
The Continuum of Care (CoC) is a U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) program that establishes regional or local planning bodies to coordinate housing and supportive services aimed at preventing and ending homelessness among individuals and families.[79] These bodies foster community-wide strategies, prioritizing rapid rehousing, permanent supportive housing, and services such as case management, mental health support, and employment assistance, often emphasizing a "Housing First" approach that provides immediate housing without preconditions like sobriety requirements.[80] The program funds nonprofit providers, state and local governments, and other entities through competitive grants, with over 400 CoCs operating nationwide as of 2024.[79] The CoC framework originated in the early 1990s amid rising homelessness concerns, with HUD developing the coordinated planning process in 1994 to streamline funding from multiple competitive homeless assistance programs under the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act of 1987.[81] Implementation began in 1995, marking a shift from fragmented services to integrated systems that track participants across service stages, from outreach and emergency shelter to transitional and permanent housing.[82] The Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing (HEARTH) Act of 2009 formally codified the CoC process, amending McKinney-Vento to emphasize measurable outcomes like housing stability and cost efficiency, while authorizing up to $2.1 billion in annual funding as of fiscal year 2022.[83] By 2012, HUD realigned funding to prioritize permanent housing over transitional models, reflecting evidence that quicker housing placements yield better retention rates.[84] Core components of a CoC include annual point-in-time counts of homeless populations, needs assessments, and coordinated entry systems that prioritize vulnerable groups like families with children and those with disabilities.[85] Services span prevention (e.g., rental assistance to avert eviction), crisis response (e.g., street outreach), and long-term supports (e.g., rapid rehousing with follow-up for up to 24 months).[86] CoCs must demonstrate performance metrics, such as reducing lengths of homelessness episodes and increasing housing placements, with HUD allocating grants based on community plans submitted competitively.[79] Empirical evaluations indicate that CoC-funded interventions, particularly Housing First models, effectively reduce homelessness durations and improve stability. A 2020 systematic review of 26 studies found Housing First decreased homelessness by 88% and boosted housing stability by 41% compared to treatment-first approaches requiring preconditions.[87] Another analysis of coordinated housing programs showed reductions in homelessness and institutionalization (e.g., jails, hospitals) relative to usual services, with cost savings from averted emergency expenditures.[88] However, national homelessness counts rose from 553,000 in 2020 to over 650,000 by 2023, suggesting that while localized CoC efforts yield participant-level gains, broader systemic factors like housing shortages and economic pressures limit population-wide impact.[89] HUD evaluations note improved service coordination post-CoC implementation, but persistent challenges include funding caps and administrative burdens that can hinder scalability.[90]Chamber of Commerce
A chamber of commerce is a nonprofit business association that unites companies within a defined geographic area to advance shared economic goals, foster networking opportunities, and promote community prosperity.[91] These organizations typically operate at local, state, national, or international levels, offering members services such as business referrals, professional development programs, and market research to reduce operational frictions and stimulate trade.[92] Membership is voluntary and often funded through dues, with participation driven by the practical benefits of collective advocacy over individual efforts in influencing policy and market conditions. The historical roots of chambers trace to merchant associations in 16th- and 17th-century Europe, evolving into formalized entities focused on commerce during the Enlightenment era's emphasis on trade liberalization.[93] In the Americas, early examples emerged in the colonial period, with the Chamber of Commerce of the State of New York established in 1768 by merchants seeking to protect shipping and import interests amid British colonial policies.[94] The United States Chamber of Commerce, the nation's largest, was founded on April 23, 1912, following a call by President William Howard Taft to consolidate fragmented local business voices into a unified national advocate for progressive-era reforms favoring industry stability.[95] Globally, the International Chamber of Commerce formed in 1919 in the aftermath of World War I, initially in Atlantic City and later headquartered in Paris, to standardize international trade rules and prevent future economic conflicts through cross-border business cooperation.[96] Core functions encompass advocacy, where chambers lobby governments for policies such as tax reductions, regulatory streamlining, and infrastructure investments that empirically correlate with business expansion and employment growth.[97] They also facilitate dispute resolution, certify business practices, and conduct economic forecasting to inform members' strategies, often partnering with public entities on workforce training initiatives.[98] For instance, the U.S. Chamber represents approximately 300,000 direct business members and affiliates with over 3 million additional entities through local and state chambers, enabling scaled influence on federal legislation.[99] Internationally, the ICC develops uniform rules like Incoterms for global transactions, adopted by merchants in over 100 countries to minimize contractual ambiguities and transaction costs.[100] Chambers play a significant role in political lobbying, with the U.S. Chamber ranking as one of Washington's most active spenders, directing funds toward campaigns supporting deregulation in sectors like energy and finance.[101] This advocacy has yielded tangible outcomes, such as endorsements for trade agreements that expanded export markets, but it has drawn scrutiny for aligning with large corporations' preferences over small enterprises, potentially skewing policies toward entities with greater dues-paying capacity.[102] Critics from conservative perspectives, including Senator Tom Cotton, have labeled the U.S. Chamber a conduit for corporate-driven social initiatives diverging from traditional free-market priorities, citing its support for certain immigration and environmental measures as evidence of diluted focus on core business competitiveness.[103] Proponents counter that such positions reflect member-driven consensus, grounded in data showing that flexible labor policies and sustainable practices enhance long-term profitability and market access.[99] Overall, chambers' influence stems from their aggregation of business data and electoral leverage, though source analyses reveal potential capture by dominant industries, warranting scrutiny of funding transparency in advocacy claims.Canadian Olympic Committee
The Canadian Olympic Committee (COC) is Canada's National Olympic Committee, a private not-for-profit organization that coordinates the country's participation in the Olympic Movement, including the Olympic Games, Pan American Games, and Youth Olympic Games.[104] It handles athlete nomination, team preparation, funding allocation through partnerships like Own the Podium, and representation to the International Olympic Committee.[105] Recognized by the IOC in 1907 following Canada's early Olympic participations dating to 1900, the COC collaborates with over 60 national sport organizations to support athletes from development stages through competition and beyond.[106] The COC's mission centers on transforming Canada via sport by driving Team Canada's podium performances and embedding Olympic values of excellence, respect, and friendship nationwide.[105] Governed by a Board of Directors that oversees operations and reports to an annual Session of 97 voting members—including sport federation delegates, athletes, and IOC representatives—the organization maintains accountability through elected terms and strategic oversight.[107] Tricia Smith, a four-time Olympian in rowing who earned silver in 1996, has led as president since her initial election in 2015, with unanimous re-election in April 2025.[108] Under COC direction, Team Canada secured 27 medals—including 9 golds—at the 2024 Paris Summer Olympics, marking the nation's strongest non-hosted, non-boycotted Summer Games performance.[109] The committee also advocated for the 2020 Tokyo Games postponement amid the COVID-19 pandemic and manages domestic initiatives like Olympic education programs.[105] In July 2024, following incidents where Canada Soccer staff deployed a drone to film New Zealand's women's team practices ahead of Olympic matches, the COC removed the involved assistant coach and analyst from the team environment, imposed internal sanctions, and issued a public apology, emphasizing zero tolerance for unethical conduct.[110]Entertainment Terms
Corrosion of Conformity
Corrosion of Conformity (C.O.C.) is an American heavy metal band formed in Raleigh, North Carolina, in June 1982 by guitarist Woody Weatherman, drummer Reed Mullin, and bassist Mike Dean, all teenagers at the time.[111] Initially rooted in the hardcore punk scene, the band drew from influences like Black Flag and Dead Kennedys, releasing their debut EP Eye for an Eye in 1983 via a local cassette and later on vinyl through Death Records.[112] Their early sound emphasized fast-paced aggression and political lyrics, as heard on the 1985 full-length Animosity, which featured crossover thrash elements blending punk speed with emerging metal riffs.[112] The band's style shifted in the late 1980s and early 1990s, incorporating sludge metal, stoner rock, and southern grooves after vocalist/guitarist Pepper Keenan joined for the 1991 album Blind, produced by John Custer.[112] This evolution peaked with Deliverance in 1994, which reached number 67 on the Billboard 200 and included hits like "Clean My Wounds," earning MTV rotation and sales exceeding 500,000 copies.[113] Follow-up Wiseblood (1996) charted at number 104, solidifying their heavier, Black Sabbath-inspired tone with Mike Dean returning on bass.[114] Later releases like America's Volume Dealer (2001) and In the Arms of God (2005) maintained this direction amid lineup changes and a hiatus from 2006 to 2010. Reuniting with Mullin, Weatherman, Dean, and Keenan, C.O.C. issued No Cross No Crown in 2019, featuring guest spots from original vocalists. Mullin died on January 27, 2020, at age 53.[115] As of 2025, core members Weatherman and Keenan lead the band, with drummer Stanton Moore (from Galactic) and bassist Bobby Landgraf contributing to the double album Forever Amplified, recorded at Barry Gibb's studio and slated for release via Nuclear Blast Records—their first studio effort in six years.[116][117] Throughout their career, C.O.C. has toured extensively, influencing sludge and stoner metal subgenres while retaining punk-era intensity in live performances.[112]Clash of Clans
Clash of Clans is a freemium mobile strategy video game developed and published by the Finnish company Supercell.[118] The game was soft-launched in Canada in July 2012 under the codename "Magic" before its global iOS release on August 2, 2012, and Android release on October 7, 2013.[119] Supercell, headquartered in Helsinki and founded in 2010, designed the title to emphasize social features, clan-based multiplayer interactions, and base-building mechanics on touchscreen devices.[118] In the game, players construct and upgrade villages using resources gathered from raids on other players' bases or collected passively over time. Troops are trained in barracks to launch attacks, with objectives centered on destroying enemy defenses, resource storages, and the town hall while defending one's own village from invasions. Clans allow cooperative play, including clan wars where groups compete for territory and rewards, and clan games for shared progression. The freemium model permits free progression through timers and grinding but accelerates advancement via in-app purchases for gems, which speed up builds and purchases.[120] The game has achieved substantial commercial success, generating over $6.4 billion in lifetime revenue primarily from microtransactions as of 2023 estimates.[121] In 2024, it earned $355 million, representing about 22% of Supercell's total revenue that year.[120] Monthly active users stabilized at 95-98 million in early 2025, reflecting sustained engagement over a decade post-launch.[122] Supercell continues to support the title with regular updates introducing new troops, buildings, and events, such as seasonal challenges and balance changes to maintain competitive viability. While praised for its addictive gameplay loop and community features, the title has faced criticism for its pay-to-win dynamics, where high-spending players gain advantages in matchmaking and progression speed, leading to community backlash over specific updates like those altering resource economies or clan perks.[120]Call of Cthulhu
Call of Cthulhu is a tabletop role-playing game of cosmic horror, drawing from H.P. Lovecraft's 1928 short story of the same name and the broader Cthulhu Mythos of eldritch entities and forbidden knowledge. Published by Chaosium Inc., the first edition appeared in October 1981, designed primarily by Sandy Petersen using Chaosium's Basic Role-Playing (BRP) system.[123][124] In gameplay, players portray human investigators—often professors, journalists, or detectives—who probe occult mysteries in settings like 1920s America, confronting ancient gods and cults that induce madness and doom. One player serves as the Keeper of Arcane Lore, akin to a game master, who adjudicates rules, portrays antagonists, and builds tension through narrative revelation rather than direct confrontation.[125] The game's mechanics prioritize investigation and psychological strain over heroic feats, with character creation involving allocation of skill points across abilities like Library Use, Spot Hidden, and Firearms, rated in percentiles from 1% to 99%. Success on actions requires rolling a d100 equal to or under the skill rating; "hard" and "extreme" difficulties halve or quintuple the effective value, respectively. Sanity, a key resource starting at 99 minus the character's Power attribute (typically 40-80 points), erodes upon witnessing Mythos horrors—major losses trigger indefinite insanity, where investigators suffer phobias or hallucinations until recovery rolls or therapy intervene. Combat proves lethal, as human durability averages 10-12 hit points, and weapons inflict damage that can kill in one strike, encouraging evasion or flight.[126] Subsequent editions refined these elements: the second edition followed in 1982 with expanded lore, while the third (1986) introduced more structured campaigns; later versions through the sixth (1996 printing) tweaked skill allocations and sanity tables for balance. The seventh edition, launched in 2014, incorporated push-roll options (retrying failed checks at escalating risk) and bonded items for minor reality-bending aids, alongside updated chase rules and pulp hero variants for less grim playstyles. Chaosium has sustained publication without ownership change, issuing over 300 supplements by 2021, including epic campaigns like Masks of Nyarlathotep (1984), which spans global continents and features 10-12 interconnected scenarios.[127][128] The game's enduring appeal stems from its fidelity to Lovecraftian themes of human insignificance, evidenced by sales exceeding 1 million copies by the 1990s and annual conventions like the Chaosium-run Cthulhu events.[129]Fitness and Sports Terms
Captains of Crush Grippers
Captains of Crush Grippers are a line of torsion-spring hand grippers manufactured by IronMind Enterprises, introduced in 1995 as a tool for building and testing crushing grip strength in athletes, particularly those in strongman competitions, rock climbing, and powerlifting.[130][131] Unlike adjustable grippers, they feature fixed-resistance springs calibrated for progressive overload, with knurled aircraft-grade aluminum handles that reduce weight while enhancing grip friction, a design innovation pioneered by IronMind to prioritize precision and durability over cheaper alternatives.[132][133] The grippers employ proprietary GR8 springs made from heat-treated, high-carbon steel wire, which provide consistent resistance calibrated against a torque meter during manufacturing to ensure uniformity across units.[131] This calibration process accounts for variables like handle width and spring geometry, though independent measurements indicate that the listed poundage ratings represent approximate closing force under ideal conditions, with actual required force potentially 40-55% lower depending on hand size, technique, and set position.[134][135] Eleven models span from beginner to elite levels, each denoted by a name or number corresponding to its resistance:| Model | Approximate Closing Force (lbs) |
|---|---|
| Guide | 60 |
| Sport | 80 |
| Trainer | 100 |
| No. 1 | 140 |
| No. 1.5 | 167.5 |
| No. 2 | 195 |
| No. 2.5 | 237.5 |
| No. 3 | 280 |
| No. 3.5 | 322.5 |
| No. 4 | 365 |