user: Question: The wildfire smoke cleared on the morning of our family wedding, just in time for the bride and groom to say their vows overlooking coal harbour. We took this as a sign that we needed to book our Vancouver seaplane flight, to really explore the azure harbour waters and take in an eagle-eyed view of this city. I suppose it was ok… oh, who am I kidding, the harbour is spectacular. Let me also point out that none of these images are touched by editing. Like 99% of my images in this blog (the other 1% is cropping and making slight adjustments), these are entirely un-doctored. We began as all good things do, by hanging out in their airport lounge, offered a mini-pastry and a hot beverage – I adventurously went for an ‘English Mist’, an Earl-Grey Latte to make myself feel a little more soothed boarding a tiny propeller plane (note: it didn’t work.) With a slightly chaotic boarding process (more noticeable after such a serene start) we were too busy sorting out the seats to realise that we had hopped on board, and within in seconds it seemed, our pilot had lifted off smoothly in a flurry of water foam. As we began to watch the world turn into a Lilliput version of itself, we barely blinked for watching beautiful vistas unfold. From tiny little islands (the above Passage Island technically belongs to West Vancouver, known as the Hollywood suburb of the city, and a couple of the homes are allegedly owned by celebrities) where the residents enjoy views of downtown Vancouver, the University of British Columbia campus, Vancouver Island, and the snow-capped mountains of Howe Sound – to the fjords all the way along the Sea to Sky Highway to Whistler. They just scatter along the horizon, like a giant has skittered his toys along an azure sheet of silk. We looped around, looking back over the stunning Stanley Park and towering grid of Vancouver downtown buildings. From prehistoric forests, to gleaming silver confections of modernity. According to the above context, answer the following question. The author of the story thinks that:
OPTIONS:
- not enough information
- Earl-Grey is relaxing
- Earl-Grey tastes bad
- Earl-Grey is energizing
Answer: Earl-Grey is relaxing

input with options: I picked up this Sporf in Amsterdam Schipol airport. A spork I'd seen before, but the addition of a simple serration on the side of the fork end makes this a genuine "three-in-one" implement for eating one's full three-course takeaway meal on the plane. The sporf is no innovation; back in 1940 the "sporf" was born. It took me until 2015 to notice this one thanks to its rather pleasant design. The sporf is a little like most strategy documents that I come across. It is one implement designed to serve a multitude of goals, but with one fatal flaw: you can only ever use one part of the sporf / strategy at any one time. With the sporf, things would get messy trying to use the spoon and knife and the same time. The knife and fork work quite well in sequence but physics prevents me using both at the same time as I can with the older technologies of knife and fork. In strategy formation, we can develop a multitude of potential purposes within one document, killer vision statement or mission. But it's important to recognise that the teams around us will only ever be able to do one thing really well at any one time. This is a lesson oft ignored by schools, in particular, as they attempt to ask educators to create an ever-more creative curriculum without having first tackled attitudes towards summative assessments throughout the year. It is also a challenge in some of the world's most successful, but now stagnating, big businesses: they've spent decades or centuries building a reputation across a large array of devices, technologies, components or clothing, but the real strategy is working out which of the current array needs killed off to enable teams in their quest to develop something totally new, properly innovative. According to the above context, answer the following question. After the end of the story, the author is probably:
OPTIONS:
- still in big business
- not enough information
- still in strategy formation
- still in Amsterdam
output: still in strategy formation

Q: Oh, yes, I accidentally insulted a bully. It was awesome. This was about a month ago. It was the last day I worked. Memorial Day at the city rec center is SLOW, especially when it's beautiful outside, but for some reason, we had two front desk attendants: me, and “bully #1”. Bully #1 clearly had a major distaste for me. She hated my tattoos, the way I would get into a heated debate one day with a police officer patron, then have a fantastic conversation with him days later about legalizing marijuana. She hated that I was liked, but still could give fuck-all about what others thought of me. Bully #2 was our financial director, who got stuck as the manager on duty that day. I honestly never had a clue she didn't like me. She was intense and sarcastic with everyone. I liked her style. On this day, I really got the feeling they were trash talking me pretty hard, the way they kept disappearing, talking over me, laughing like mean girls. I blew it off, because I was down an internet rabbit hole, trying to wrap my brain around some concepts. I was looking at a word, and while I like to think I know exact definitions, sometimes I ask people their take on it. Many psychological terms have some subjective meaning. I spun around in my chair, locked eyes with #2, and asked her: “What do you know about Machiavellianism?” I swear to God, all I wanted was her take on it (she's a smart cookie), and all hell broke loose. I now realize that she thought I was passive-aggressively accusing her of said word. They got really nasty (behind my back, of course). They retreated to the back for awhile, and left me by myself. Cue loud, mean girl laughter. When #1 resumed her post next to me at the front desk, I calmly told her, “I'm cashing out, and leaving. I'm uncomfortable.” And I did. It was noon. We were closing at 1. I figured those bitches could handle it on their own. According to the above context, answer the following question. The author's coworkers private conversation in the back room probably lasted:

OPTIONS:
- several minutes
- days
- multiple hours
- not enough information

A:

assistant: several minutes