Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2009 July 18

= July 18 =

"Transactions where you need s.o. with an MBA at your company"
In an answer above, someone writes "You don't need an MBA to start your own company, but there are some transactions where you need s.o. with an MBA at your company. Some government contracts and big bureaucratic corporations also require that as part of their "vendor quality" profile." What transactions would these be please? And what is "s.o"? 78.146.236.46 (talk) 09:18, 18 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Someone 92.23.194.83 (talk) 10:05, 18 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Government is always trying to deal with companies. These are not apparent from an outside viewpoint. So to check the of the company a questionnaire is completed. This deals with many aspects of the company's policy, ethical standpoint, reliability, and so on.  The quality of the staff is also important. Hence the concern for experienced/properly qualified people (not the same thing of course). It is unfortunate that given all of the care they take, Government contracts are notorious for cost over-runs and bail-outs.86.197.147.173 (talk) 15:53, 18 July 2009 (UTC)DT


 * Without a cited source, I would be skeptical of these claims. Tempshill (talk) 17:04, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I will go further than Tempshill: there is no part of an MBA that gives the holder any licensing or other professional authority. So, there is no business or legal task that requires an MBA. It is an academic degree only. Sometimes an MBA is combined with another designation, like an accounting qualification or a law degree, that does permit the holder to do certain business activities that are not permitted to those without that additional designation, but not otherwise. A company may require employees in certain positions to have MBAs as evidence of exposure to, if not mastery of, certain concepts and principles of business; however, that is a purely private requirement. // BL \\ (talk) 17:26, 18 July 2009 (UTC)


 * It is not suggested that the holder of an MBA gives any actual benefit - it is an academic degree, as has been said. But it is still a box that Governments like to tick. Presume they think that it means something, even though some MBAs are not good at the actual business of commerce. Cannot see what value a cited source is in this case, we are describing common practice in general terms. And government over-runs are reported every month.86.219.35.243 (talk) 14:41, 19 July 2009 (UTC)DT

OK, so the answer to my first question is that an MBA is required as part of the vetting process for government contracts? I'm still wondering what "s.o." means. Thanks. 78.146.249.124 (talk) 10:34, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * It is just shorthand for "someone." So that you have "someone with an MBA." Livewireo (talk) 13:30, 20 July 2009 (UTC)


 * No, MBAs are not required as a vetting process for government contracts. MBAs are only as valuable as potential employers want it to be. Since some cost more than $100,000 and two years of time, I don't know if it is economically meaningful go through this path. Specially after this crisis, employers (and any buyer) is wary about how much value he is getting for his dollar. That could simply mean that they will prefer people with a plain B.A. and some experience than a employee with an MBA, a sense of entitlement and lots of debt.Quest09 (talk) 16:11, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry folks. I can offer only some old OR. Our company ran into such requirements at least 3 times.  First of all to get a bank loan. That may have been the bank loan officers very own idea, but we needed the loan and the solution was as easy as changing one of the "on paper" directors.  The next was indeed for a government project.  We were asked to supply the qualifications of all individuals involved in the project and then the official mumbled something about insufficient project management qualifications (!) We asked what a couple of PhDs and MAs could do to make him happy and sure enough he asked for someone with an MBA.  Again that may just have been that one officials odd idea of qualification, but I bet we wouldn't have gotten the contract if we hadn't assigned our "puppet" director to be "virtual" project manager".  The next time was with a project to expand a client's business to Europe.  The lawyer there (can't remember whether that was Germany, Sweden, Spain or where) said they needed someone with a business degree as a local director.  So, it does happen and no one will tell you about it before you run into such weird stuff.-- 71.236.26.74 (talk) 22:40, 20 July 2009 (UTC)


 * That was certainly in Germany. They always ask for some strange formalities. Otherwise, I will seriously advice against putting a director "on paper" just to obtain something. Legally and strategically, this can be a terrible move. Quest09 (talk) 16:51, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * OR: It depends. If he's one of the dads or a former prof. and you need their funds/support/name to get going it can work out wonderfully. --71.236.26.74 (talk) 06:56, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Meeting people
Since my last relationship soured many weeks back, I am now thinking about the awkward but necessary steps towards trying to meet new women and forming a new relationship. Personally, I tend to find that making the initial connection is the most frustrating part. I don't expect any magic bullets, but I'm wondering if this community has any practical suggestions about what has worked for them? For example, I've tried a couple dating sites over the years and they never seemed to work very well, but perhaps there are particular sites/formats that are better than others. Or perhaps people think that clubs and other sorts of activities work better? Perhaps there are even studies out there about what works in general. If people want to tailor their response to my particular situtation, I'm a man in his late 20s in California. 76.225.157.109 (talk) 11:53, 18 July 2009 (UTC)


 * That really doesn't narrow it a whole lot, becasue it's hard to know what peer groups you're involved with. Also, are you near family? A really good friend wasn't interested in one woman a few years ago,a nd introduced her to his brother, with whom he felt she would be compatible. He had to invite with to dinner with him a few times, but eventually they met and married just this spring.


 * So, it isn't necesasrily just you that has to be looking. Ask those in your peer group to help. If they are close to you, they will know your interests and may strike the right chord, like with my friend's brother.


 * As far as socializing, my friends and I have found friendship is important to develop first, because it's really hard to know what a person is like the first few minutes or even hours you're there, so while bars and online places have found success, those are few and far between. It boils down to participating in the same activities together, IMHO. Becasue, that's what you and a woman want. Staring at each other's face for the rest of your lives would get boring, no matter how pretty she was. :-)Somebody or his brother (talk) 15:05, 18 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm probably just making a gross generalisation, but since you live in California, wine! It's alcoholic so lowers inhibitions (not too much mind) making the first meeting easier, it's a mature pasttime if you want or an immature one if you'd prefer so you can easily meet whoever you want. Go on a wine tasting thing. Prokhorovka (talk) 15:08, 18 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I suggest "virtuous joint undertaking"; I've done, or know people who have done, Team in Training and Habitat for Humanity. They all ended up with far more friends than romantic hookups (but Metcalfe's law still applies), but these have the advantages of being worthwhile in and of themselves, mixing you with people you'd otherwise never meet, and not having any of that bar-scene "meatmarket" feel. 87.114.153.140 (talk) 18:54, 18 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Maybe it might help if you first budgeted some time? Your post reads as though you are in a hurry and don't want to spend a lot of time on this thing.  Most partnerships require spending time together at mundane mutual activities, some of which were not planned or would be high on your agenda if you were on your own.  If you give of the air of someone whom your new love interest is going to have to make an appointment with for together time you won't look like a keeper.  As the other posters have indicated sometimes your best chance of finding anything/anyone is just stop looking. Find a hobby or something you wouldn't mind doing with your girfriend/spouse for the rest of your life.  Good luck. 71.236.26.74 (talk) 03:52, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

The best advice I can give is to just put yourself in as many day to day situations as you can were there is low pressure (speed dating is probably not good for this). If you have difficulty approaching women, do as much as you can to make yourself seem approachable (smile a lot, but not enough to appear crazy - the first time I did this I was approached within about 3 minutes!). Try to just strike up day to day conversations (do this with lots of people, not just women you fancy - it is good practice), in the grocery store, in queues, on the bus etc. You don't have to go out with a hunter mentality, just make a lot of simple day to day connections and you should find a good match fairly quickly. If you approach somebody in a club, you are positioning yourself as a potential suitor who has to be judged very quickly, in less forced situations there is not as much pressure for either side. Just my two cents. Shower of Jagged Steel (talk) 13:03, 19 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Evening classes, or as I think they are called in the US, night school, are good places for meeting people including women of similar intellect. If you have an interest, joining a local club or society for that interest may also have similar results. You could try PlentyofFish which is said to be free. Do not expect things to happen quickly. In the UK, some of the more intellectual magazines have personal columns which are effective in getting dates with more up-market or up-scale women: perhaps there are similar magazines in the US. For pure physical contact, there are adult contact websites and magazines, but I think these would be dangerous from a health point of view at the very least. 78.149.162.38 (talk) 18:09, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Faulty Television
I've got a Thompson Quadra, which I bought sometime in 1998. I stopped using it about two years back, but when I opened it a few days ago, I found the letters PI written on the screen. There was no sound, and the remote wasn't working either. I've tried Googling the problem, but nobody seems to have the answer. Can anyone help me?? 117.194.227.51 (talk) 17:41, 18 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Googling turned up this suggestion: "when the TV is in stand by mode, press both volume controls on the TV and the blue botton on remote control for 5-8 seconds. All buttons must be pressed at the same time". --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 18:56, 18 July 2009 (UTC)


 * (I assume you changed the batteries in the remote?) --98.217.14.211 (talk) 20:03, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah. The batteries are brand new, and they're working normally when held in front of that strange tool mechanics have that blip when a functioning remote control is held in front of it (I don't know it's specific name). And I've seen that so called "solution" posted by Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM earlier in my own Google searches. It doesn't work. Besides, it's supposed to be the solution in case someone has P written on their screen, not PI. 117.194.230.13 (talk) 10:48, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Have you tried sticking the TV in a landfill site, sticking a shotgun in your mouth, and then pulling the trigger?83.100.250.79 (talk) 10:58, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

No yet. Perhaps you could show me how to do it first. I expected a more civilized answer from a Wikipedian.... 117.194.230.13 (talk) 11:15, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I left a message for 83.100.250.79 reminding them to be more civil in their replies. Strangely, we don't have a user warning for civility.  Astronaut (talk) 15:52, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * a Twinkle level 3 warning for inappropriate use of humor would fit. Edison (talk) 00:14, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

...And yet, for the first time, I've failed to obtain a correct response from the Reference Desk... Is what I ask impossible to fix? 117.194.232.131 (talk) 08:03, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * There really seems to be very little information on that model on the web. Just a wild, wild guess: Since someone above mentioned batteries, maybe the battery for the memory inside the set is faulty.  That would be a job for a repair-shop though.  Are you sure the TV can handle the input signal from your antenna/cable box/other equipment.  Something you could maybe check is whether you get any response by using the on-set controls.  Good luck. 71.236.26.74 (talk) 22:48, 20 July 2009 (UTC)


 * One common theme I've seen on the web is some people have difficulty using this TV with replacement remote controls. Is your remote the original one?  I did try a little lateral thinking.  Perhaps the "PI" is in fact "P1", meaning "Program 1" or "Channel 1".  If you can get the remote to work, perhaps there is a menu to let you tune it in, or small thumbscrews somewhere to tune in each channel.  Alterntively, searching on the web suggests that this TV might be the same one available in eastern Europe.  Perhaps the "PI" is infact "pl" (as in "Poland") and it is telling you the language is set to Polish.
 * One other thing to consider though: it is quite an old TV, maybe it would be easier to get a replacement. Astronaut (talk) 00:50, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe it wants you to type in the digits of Pi on the remote. Edison (talk) 00:57, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * All of them. Ginogrz (talk) 00:44, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Scotch and Scotch ale
I read that Scotch is distilled beer and I was wondering if there is a beer that taste like Scotch or a beer that would be the beer to make Scotch if it was distilled? I found that there are Ales called Scotch Ale and I was wondering if these ales taste like Scotch or if they are the beer that would be Scotch if they were distilled? Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.174.131.33 (talk) 21:19, 18 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Scotch is whisky, and Scotch ale is a pale ale (the article describes taste). Whisky is distilled from fermented grain mash.  Check out the articles.  They are quite informative.  152.16.59.190 (talk) 22:49, 18 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Whiskey is "distilled beer" only insofar as they both started out as some grains boiling in some water - they call this wort. Nothing that's distilled is going to be called "beer".  Probably the only way a beer is going to have any whiskey-like flavors would be if it were aged in wood casks, which is not unheard of, but it not at all typical Friday (talk) 16:33, 19 July 2009 (UTC)


 * You might be interested in "Innis and Gunn Oak Aged Beer". More details here. And it's pretty good. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:45, 20 July 2009 (UTC)


 * The OP is correct insofar as whisky passes through a stage (reached by fermenting the wort) that is essentially beer: to quote the Scotch whisky article, "The resulting liquid, now at about 5–7% alcohol by volume, is called "wash" and is very similar to a rudimentary beer." However, because it is destined to be further processed (in particular, distilled, and then aged in wood) and because the intended final product is somewhat different, details of wash's production up to that point differ from those of beer/ale proper, and it is unlikely to be very palatable.


 * Firstly, the varieties and blends of malted barley used to make the mash will likely be different from ones appropriate to beers. More importantly, after whisky wort is produced, it is immediately cooled and then fermented (to produce the wash), while beer worts are first boiled for an hour or two, usually with added hops, before the fermentation stage. This boiling both greatly affects the beer's eventual aroma and flavour, and sterilises it: whisky's sterilisation occurs in its subsequent distillation, which of course also produces significant but rather different aroma and flavour changes.


 * While it would be perfectly possible (though expensive) to take a finished beer and ferment it into whisky, the earlier beer-specific details of its brewing would make the end product somewhat different from a conventional whisky; in particular, it would probably be rather bitter unless one had started from a really mild (i.e. almost or completely unhopped) mild ale recipe. A closer approximation could be made by fermenting some unboiled beer wort: I believe one or two "craft brewers" in the UK have made whisky (or have had whisky made by a distillery) from their wort, but this remains an occasional novelty product. Managing to combine both the skills of good brewing and good distilling in one team, and the elements of good beer and good whisky in one wort, would be an unlikely feat.


 * As earlier posters have said, Scotch (or Scottish) Ales are not the raw material for Scotch whisky, nor are they generally intended to resemble it, they merely comprise a broad style of beer originating in Scotland and popular both there and elsewhere (sometimes in transmogrified form, as in Belgium). However, from time to time craft brewers do brew beers specifically intended to evoke whisky, usually by introducing aroma and flavour characteristics resembling the peat-smoke elements of whisky, and/or ageing the beers in whisky casks (which utilises the active effects that the wood has on alcoholic beverages, as well as any residual whisky itself). 87.81.230.195 (talk) 23:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)