Q: If It is possible, for example, for two persons to interview the same informant and find that one has used a one-sentence summary for a detailed, rich, 5-minute discourse while the other captured much more of the complexity and essence of what was said and what was happening., can we say that "The reason why there might be different results from interviewing the same informant is because of the interviewer's style."?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

A: it is not possible to tell

Premise:
"so it's all about you say it is all voluntary do they"
Hypothesis: It is always all about you.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

it is not possible to tell

input question: They 1) be capable of being described in financial, economic, or quantitative terms; and 2) provide a plausible basis for concluding that the program has had or will have this intended effect. If this premise is true, does that tell us:"They will not be described in any way, shape, or form in a financial, economic, or quantitative effect, and they should not achieve the final goal as intended."?

OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

output answer: no

Question:
Based on the premise "three martini lunch or whatever they say", can we conclude that "Three martini lunch is an expression."? OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
****
Answer:
yes

Question: Sentence A: no it's a necessity

Sentence B: It's a necessity

If sentence A is true, how about sentence B?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

Answer: no

Question: Sentence A: Such relationships symbolize the importance of information technology and management within their organizations.

Sentence B: Management is typically considered by many executives to be slightly more important than information technology.

If sentence A is true, how about sentence B?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

Answer:
it is not possible to tell