text:
_THE SIAMESE TWIN MYSTERY_ is an English language American novel written in 1933 by Ellery Queen. It is the seventh of the Ellery Queen mysteries.

Plot summary

Inspector Queen and his son Ellery are vacationing in a mountainous area of the United States when they are forced by a forest fire to seek shelter at Arrow Head, the mountaintop home of famous surgeon Dr. John Xavier, which soon becomes impossible to escape due to the fire. There the sleuths meet an unusual assortment of characters, beginning with Dr. Xavier and his wife Sarah; his brother Mark; his medical assistant Percival Holmes; his handyman “Bones”; the housekeeper, Mrs. Wheary; and a houseguest, Ann Forrest. Miss Forrest has recently lost a silver ring; Dr. Holmes likewise finds himself missing a cheap signet ring. That night, Ellery spies a strange crab-like shape moving in the upstairs hallway, and, independently, Inspector Queen discovers that also present at the house is the wealthy Marie Carreau, a fixture of Washington high society; Ann is Mrs. Carreau's personal secretary. In the morning, Dr. Xavier is found dead in his study — shot twice with a revolver which has been wiped clean of any fingerprints. In his right hand he clutches the torn half of a playing card: the six of spades.

The previous night, the Queens had encountered on the road a heavyset and unsavory man, who — his escape blocked by the fire — now returns to the house, giving his name unconvincingly as “Smith.” It is further revealed that Marie Carreau had come to the house to consult with Dr. Xavier on the subject of her teenage sons, Julian and Francis, who are xiphopagous conjoined twins. It was the twins who had cast the crab-like shadow seen by Ellery in the hallway. Meanwhile, the Inspector makes the connection between the _six_ of spades and Mrs. Xavier's initials — Sarah Isère Xavier — and accuses her of murdering the surgeon in a jealous rage at his lengthy conferences with Mrs. Carreau. Mrs. Xavier instantly confesses to the murder and collapses in a faint. However, Ellery observes that Dr. Xavier, who was right-handed, would naturally have used his right hand to crumple and discard half of the card, which would leave the uncrumpled half clutched in his _left_ hand. It follows that the playing card must have been torn and placed in Xavier's hand by some left-handed person — that is, by the murderer.

The Queens investigate Dr. Xavier's laboratory and find that Xavier has been experimenting with the separation of conjoined twins of various animal species — always without success — and that “Bones” has been burying the failures in the garden. That night, the Queens search Mrs. Xavier's jewel-box and find that it contains no rings at all. The next morning, the party attempt to find a way past the increasingly menacing forest fire, but to no avail. Ellery observes a conversation between Smith and Mrs. Carreau, and deduces that Smith had been blackmailing Carreau, threatening to publicize the existence of her sons — but that the murder, sure to draw publicity, had neutralized Smith's hold over Carreau. The Queens conduct a series of “tests” to prove that each member of the party is right-handed, _except for Mark Xavier_; on this evidence, Ellery accuses Mark of murdering Dr. Xavier and planting the card to throw suspicion on Mrs. Xavier. Mark, in a panic, tries to escape; Inspector Queen shoots him and returns him to the house, gravely wounded. Mark confesses that he planted the torn card to frame Mrs. Xavier, but insists that Dr. Xavier was dead before Mark entered the room — and insists that he knows who the killer is! But Holmes' morphine takes effect before Mark can reveal the murderer's identity. Inspector Queen stands watch over Mark and is there at 1 a.m. when Mark regains consciousness; but when Ellery comes down at 2 a.m. to check on his father, he finds the Inspector chloroformed and Mark Xavier dead — poisoned by oxalic acid — clutching in his right hand the torn half of a jack of diamonds.

Ellery finds Mrs. Carreau awake in her room, which is suspicious. Inspector Queen discovers that while he was chloroformed, somebody stole the wedding ring off his finger. The party return to their rooms. When somebody tries to break into the safe where Xavier's original deck of playing cards was being kept as evidence, Ellery on a hunch counts the cards in that deck and discovers that it is missing _two_ cards — the six of spades and the jack of diamonds! The Queens deduce that when Mark found his brother's body, Dr. Xavier had been clutching a torn _jack_, which Mark _replaced_ with the six of spades to frame his sister-in-law (because with her out of the way, Mark stood to inherit Xavier's estate). When Mark in turn was murdered, he must have decided that the best way to clue at his murderer's identity would be to reproduce Dr. Xavier's authentic clue — the jack of diamonds. Further, Ellery observes that the French name for the suit of diamonds is _carreaux_, and the image on a jack is that of two conjoined young men! He concludes that (because the card was torn in half) only _one_ of the Carreau twins is the murderer, and suggests that the twin may have killed Xavier in self-defense, out of fear that Xavier would try (and fail) to separate the twins surgically. The Queens speculate on the “beautiful headache” such a case would present: Murder is a capital offense, but supposing only one of the twins to be guilty of murder, what would become of the other?

Meanwhile, the fire has been creeping closer and closer to the summit. An airplane drops a message from the local sheriff, informing the party that all attempts to contain the fire have failed and advising them to dig firebreaks around the house. They dig through the night and into the following afternoon; but the fire jumps their trench and reaches the house. The party retreat to the cellar as the house burns above them. Ellery now confronts the blackmailer Smith; it is revealed that Smith was one of the doctors in attendance at the Carreau twins' birth, and has been blackmailing Mrs. Carreau for sixteen years. Ellery now rejects his theory that the murderer is one of the twins, and even that the torn jack of diamonds is an authentic clue at all. The jack in Xavier's right hand, which Mark had replaced with a six to frame Mrs. Xavier, _still_ could not have been an authentic clue from the right-handed Xavier. Furthermore, Ellery discovered the missing jack only after the murderer's feeble attempt to break into the safe, when all the time the key to the safe was in the pocket of the chloroformed Inspector Queen! This indicates that the murderer was trying to draw attention to the Carreau twins — and away from his true identity.

As the party continue to cower below the burning house, Ellery comes to the matter of the missing rings. As the murderer nonsensically removed even Inspector Queen's wedding band, he concludes that the murderer must be a kleptomaniac on the specific subject of rings. He dramatically removes his own ring, places it in the center of the room, and waits for the kleptomaniac to crack. The gambit works; Mrs. Xavier cannot stand the tension and shrieks her confession. Her jewel-box contained no rings because Dr. Xavier had known of her kleptomania; that was why he'd kept her isolated on the mountain away from anything that could trigger it. She indeed _had_ killed her husband out of jealousy; planted the torn card to frame the Carreau twins; and, when accused by Ellery, confessed _truthfully_ — which told Mark that he'd accidentally “framed” the real murderer. She then killed Mark, _again_ leaving a jack of diamonds in an attempt to frame the Carreaus.

Having confessed, Mrs. Xavier dashes up the cellar stairs and disappears into the flames — certainly to her death. A few minutes later, it begins to rain.

Literary significance and criticism

The character of Ellery Queen and the more-or-less locked room mystery were probably initially suggested by the novels featuring detective Philo Vance by S.S. Van Dine, which were very popular at the time. At this point in time, however, Van Dine's sales were dropping and Queen's were beginning to rise. This novel was the seventh in a long series of novels featuring Ellery Queen, the first nine containing a nationality in the title.

The introduction to this novel contained a detail which is now not considered part of the Ellery Queen canon. The introduction is written as by the anonymous “J.J. McC.”, a friend of the Queens. Other details of the lives of the fictional Queen family contained in earlier introductions have now disappeared and are never mentioned again; the introductory device of “J.J. McC.” lasts only through the tenth novel, _Halfway House_, then vanishes (though J.J. appears onstage in _Face to Face_ in 1967).

The “nationality” mysteries had the unusual feature of a “Challenge to the Reader” just before the ending is revealed—the novel breaks the fourth wall and speaks directly to the reader, stating that all essential facts have been revealed and the solution to the mystery is now possible. The first paperback edition of this novel does not contain such a challenge, possibly because World War II paper restrictions in the United States meant that all unessential material must be trimmed.

title: The Siamese Twin Mystery

question: What does the article say about clues?

text: The early references to missing rings should be mentioned, since (while easy to overlook as clues initially) they wind up playing a key role in the solving of the case.

answer: The revolver that was used to shoot Dr. Xaview was wiped clean of any fingerprints. In his right hand, there's a torn half of a playing card: the six of spades. The Inspector connects the card to Mrs. Xavier's initials. He later concludes that it must have been placed in Xavier's hand by someone left-handed. Mark confesses to having planted the torn card and is later found dead clutching the torn half of a jack of diamonds. Ellery then discovers a playing card deck that's missing two cards. Later, Ellery rejects the theory that the jack of diamonds is an authentic clue at all. The missing rings become the clue to solving the case, as they point to Mrs. Xavier, a kleptomaniac.

text: The answer should mention that the torn card is a clue that the murderer is left-handed.

text: The answer should mention that the torn card is a clue to the identity of the murderer.

text: The answer should mention that the torn card was meant to frame Mrs. Xavier.

text: The answer should mention that the torn card is evidence that the killer is left-handed.

text: The answer doesn't make it clear that the six of spades and the jack of diamonds are the two cards that are missing from the deck.

text: The response contains inaccurate information.

text: The answer does not make it clear that Ellery had made a connection between the torn card, his mother's initials and his father's being left handed (implying he thinks his mother committed the murder). This occurred after Dr. Xavier was found dead.

answer: The revolver that was used to shoot Dr. Xaview was wiped clean of any fingerprints. In his right hand, there's a torn half of a playing card: the six of spades. The Inspector connects the card to Mrs. Xavier's initials. He later concludes that it must have been placed in Xavier's hand by someone left-handed. Mark confesses to having planted the torn card and is later found dead clutching the torn half of a jack of diamonds. Ellery then discovers a playing card deck that's missing two cards. Later, Ellery rejects the theory that the jack of diamonds is an authentic clue at all. The missing rings become the clue to solving the case, as they point to Mrs. Xavier, a kleptomaniac.

answer: The revolver that was used to shoot Dr. Xaview was wiped clean of any fingerprints. In his right hand, there's a torn half of a playing card: the six of spades. The Inspector connects the card to Mrs. Xavier's initials. He later concludes that it must have been placed in Xavier's hand by someone left-handed. The Queens later discover that Xavier's jewel box contains no rings at all. Mark confesses to having planted the torn card and is later found dead clutching the torn half of a jack of diamonds. Inspector Queen discovers that someone has stolen the wedding ring off his finger. Ellery then discovers a playing card deck that's missing two cards. Later, Ellery rejects the theory that the jack of diamonds is an authentic clue at all. The missing rings become the clue to solving the case, as they point to Mrs. Xavier, a kleptomaniac.

text: The answer should mention the crab-like shadow.

text: The answer could be more specific about the missing rings.

text: The answer does not mention the crab-like shadow.

text: The answer should mention that the torn playing cards are clues left by the murderer.

text: Ellery rejecting the theory that the jack of diamonds isn't an authentic clue should be at the end, as it's Ellery's conclusion

answer: The torn half of a playing card is found in Dr. Xavier's hand. The Queens investigate Dr. Xavier's laboratory and find that Xavier has been experimenting with the separation of conjoined twins of various animal species — always without success — and that “Bones” has been burying the failures in the garden. That night, the Queens search Mrs. Xavier's jewel-box and find that it contains no rings at all. Ellery observes a conversation between Smith and Mrs. Carreau, and deduces that Smith had been blackmailing Carreau, threatening to publicize the existence of her sons — but that the murder, sure to draw publicity, had neutralized Smith's hold over Carreau. The Queens conduct a series of “tests” to prove that each member of the party is right-handed, _except for Mark Xavier_; on this evidence, Ellery accuses Mark of murdering Dr. Xavier and planting the card to throw suspicion on Mrs. Xavier. Mark, in a panic, tries to escape; Inspector Queen shoots him and returns him to the house, gravely wounded. Mark confesses that he planted the torn card to frame Mrs. Xavier, but insists that Dr. Xavier was dead before Mark entered the room — and insists that he knows who the killer is! But Holmes' morphine takes effect before Mark can reveal the murderer's identity. Inspector Queen stands watch over Mark and is there at 1 a.m. when Mark regains consciousness; but when Ellery comes down at 2 a.m. to check on his father, he finds the Inspector chloroformed and Mark Xavier dead — poisoned by oxalic acid — clutching in his right hand the torn half of a jack of diamonds. Ellery finds Mrs. Carreau awake in her room, which is suspicious. Inspector Queen discovers that while he was chloroformed, somebody stole the wedding ring off his finger. When somebody tries to break into the safe where Xavier's original deck of playing cards was being kept as evidence, Ellery on a hunch counts the cards in that deck and discovers that it is missing _two_ cards — the six of spades and the jack of diamonds! The Queens deduce that when Mark found his brother's body, Dr. Xavier had been clutching a torn _jack_, which Mark _replaced_ with the six of spades to frame his sister-in-law (because with her out of the way, Mark stood to inherit Xavier's estate). When Mark in turn was murdered, he must have decided that the best way to clue at his murderer's identity would be to reproduce Dr. Xavier's authentic clue — the jack of diamonds. Further, Ellery observes that the French name for the suit of diamonds is _carreaux_, and the image on a jack is that of two conjoined young men! He concludes that (because the card was torn in half) only _one_ of the Carreau twins is the murderer, and suggests that the twin may have killed Xavier in self-defense, out of fear that Xavier would try (and fail) to separate the twins surgically. The Queens speculate on the “beautiful headache” such a case would present: Murder is a capital offense, but supposing only one of the twins to be guilty of murder, what would become of the other? Meanwhile, the fire has been creeping closer and closer to the summit. An airplane drops a message from the local sheriff, informing the party that all attempts to contain the fire have failed and advising them to dig firebreaks around the house. They dig through the night and into the following afternoon; but the fire jumps their trench and reaches the house. The party retreat to the cellar as the house burns above them. Ellery now confronts the blackmailer Smith; it is revealed that Smith was one of the doctors in attendance at the Carreau twins' birth, and has been blackmailing Mrs. Carreau for sixteen years. Ellery now rejects his theory that the murderer is one of the twins, and even that the torn jack of diamonds is an authentic clue at all. The jack in Xavier's right hand, which Mark had replaced with a six to frame Mrs. Xavier, _still_ could not have been an authentic clue from the right-handed Xavier. Furthermore, Ellery discovered the missing jack only after the murderer's feeble attempt to break into the safe, when all the time the key to the safe was in the pocket of the chloroformed Inspector Queen! This indicates that the murderer was trying to draw attention to the Carreau twins — and away from his true identity. As the party continue to cower below the burning house, Ellery comes to the matter of the missing rings. As the murderer nonsensically removed even Inspector Queen's wedding band, he concludes that the murderer must be a kleptomaniac on the specific subject of rings. He dramatically removes his own ring, places it in the center of the room, and waits for the kleptomaniac to crack. The gambit works; Mrs. Xavier cannot stand the tension and shrieks her confession. Her jewel-box contained no rings because Dr. Xavier had known of her kleptomania; that was why he'd kept her isolated on the mountain away from anything that could trigger it. She indeed _had_ killed her husband out of jealousy; planted the torn card to frame the Carreau twins; and, when accused by Ellery, confessed _truthfully_ — which told Mark that he'd accidentally “framed” the real murderer. She then killed Mark, _again_ leaving a jack of diamonds in an attempt to frame the Carreaus. Having confessed, Mrs. Xavier dashes up the cellar stairs and disappears into the flames — certainly to her death. A few minutes later, it begins to rain.

text: The answer is a copy of the article.

text: The answer is a copy of the text

text: The answer is a copy-paste of the article

text: The answer is a copy and paste of the article and not a summary of the clues.

text: All of the information other than the first sentence is irrelevant and unnecessary.

text: The answer is a copy of the article and needs to be rewritten. The answer should just discuss Dr.Xavier's authentic clue, the jack of diamonds.

answer: The revolver that was used to shoot Dr. Xaview was wiped clean of any fingerprints. In his right hand, there's a torn half of a playing card: the six of spades. The Inspector connects the card to Mrs. Xavier's initials. He later concludes that it must have been placed in Xavier's hand by someone left-handed. The Queens later discover that Xavier's jewel box contains no rings at all. Mark confesses to having planted the torn card and is later found dead clutching the torn half of a jack of diamonds. Inspector Queen discovers that someone has stolen the wedding ring off his finger. Ellery then discovers a playing card deck that's missing two cards. Later, Ellery rejects the theory that the jack of diamonds is an authentic clue at all. The missing rings become the clue to solving the case, as they point to Mrs. Xavier, a kleptomaniac.

answer: The torn half of a playing card is found in Dr. Xavier's hand. The Queens investigate Dr. Xavier's laboratory and find that Xavier has been experimenting with the separation of conjoined twins of various animal species — always without success — and that “Bones” has been burying the failures in the garden. That night, the Queens search Mrs. Xavier's jewel-box and find that it contains no rings at all. Ellery observes a conversation between Smith and Mrs. Carreau, and deduces that Smith had been blackmailing Carreau, threatening to publicize the existence of her sons — but that the murder, sure to draw publicity, had neutralized Smith's hold over Carreau. The Queens conduct a series of “tests” to prove that each member of the party is right-handed, _except for Mark Xavier_; on this evidence, Ellery accuses Mark of murdering Dr. Xavier and planting the card to throw suspicion on Mrs. Xavier. Mark, in a panic, tries to escape; Inspector Queen shoots him and returns him to the house, gravely wounded. Mark confesses that he planted the torn card to frame Mrs. Xavier, but insists that Dr. Xavier was dead before Mark entered the room — and insists that he knows who the killer is! But Holmes' morphine takes effect before Mark can reveal the murderer's identity. Inspector Queen stands watch over Mark and is there at 1 a.m. when Mark regains consciousness; but when Ellery comes down at 2 a.m. to check on his father, he finds the Inspector chloroformed and Mark Xavier dead — poisoned by oxalic acid — clutching in his right hand the torn half of a jack of diamonds. Ellery finds Mrs. Carreau awake in her room, which is suspicious. Inspector Queen discovers that while he was chloroformed, somebody stole the wedding ring off his finger. When somebody tries to break into the safe where Xavier's original deck of playing cards was being kept as evidence, Ellery on a hunch counts the cards in that deck and discovers that it is missing _two_ cards — the six of spades and the jack of diamonds! The Queens deduce that when Mark found his brother's body, Dr. Xavier had been clutching a torn _jack_, which Mark _replaced_ with the six of spades to frame his sister-in-law (because with her out of the way, Mark stood to inherit Xavier's estate). When Mark in turn was murdered, he must have decided that the best way to clue at his murderer's identity would be to reproduce Dr. Xavier's authentic clue — the jack of diamonds. Further, Ellery observes that the French name for the suit of diamonds is _carreaux_, and the image on a jack is that of two conjoined young men! He concludes that (because the card was torn in half) only _one_ of the Carreau twins is the murderer, and suggests that the twin may have killed Xavier in self-defense, out of fear that Xavier would try (and fail) to separate the twins surgically. The Queens speculate on the “beautiful headache” such a case would present: Murder is a capital offense, but supposing only one of the twins to be guilty of murder, what would become of the other? Meanwhile, the fire has been creeping closer and closer to the summit. An airplane drops a message from the local sheriff, informing the party that all attempts to contain the fire have failed and advising them to dig firebreaks around the house. They dig through the night and into the following afternoon; but the fire jumps their trench and reaches the house. The party retreat to the cellar as the house burns above them. Ellery now confronts the blackmailer Smith; it is revealed that Smith was one of the doctors in attendance at the Carreau twins' birth, and has been blackmailing Mrs. Carreau for sixteen years. Ellery now rejects his theory that the murderer is one of the twins, and even that the torn jack of diamonds is an authentic clue at all. The jack in Xavier's right hand, which Mark had replaced with a six to frame Mrs. Xavier, _still_ could not have been an authentic clue from the right-handed Xavier. Furthermore, Ellery discovered the missing jack only after the murderer's feeble attempt to break into the safe, when all the time the key to the safe was in the pocket of the chloroformed Inspector Queen! This indicates that the murderer was trying to draw attention to the Carreau twins — and away from his true identity. As the party continue to cower below the burning house, Ellery comes to the matter of the missing rings. As the murderer nonsensically removed even Inspector Queen's wedding band, he concludes that the murderer must be a kleptomaniac on the specific subject of rings. He dramatically removes his own ring, places it in the center of the room, and waits for the kleptomaniac to crack. The gambit works; Mrs. Xavier cannot stand the tension and shrieks her confession. Her jewel-box contained no rings because Dr. Xavier had known of her kleptomania; that was why he'd kept her isolated on the mountain away from anything that could trigger it. She indeed _had_ killed her husband out of jealousy; planted the torn card to frame the Carreau twins; and, when accused by Ellery, confessed _truthfully_ — which told Mark that he'd accidentally “framed” the real murderer. She then killed Mark, _again_ leaving a jack of diamonds in an attempt to frame the Carreaus. Having confessed, Mrs. Xavier dashes up the cellar stairs and disappears into the flames — certainly to her death. A few minutes later, it begins to rain.

text: The response is largely a rip-off of the original text.


text:
YANG YUANQING (, born 12 November 1964) is a Chinese business executive and philanthropist who is the current chairman and CEO of Lenovo.[1] According to Hurun Report's 2013 China Rich List, he had an estimated fortune of around US$620 million and was the 533rd richest person in China.[2]

Early life and education

Yang was born on 12 November 1964 to parents both educated as surgeons. He spent his childhood in Hefei in Anhui province. He grew up poor, as his parents were paid the same salaries as manual laborers. Yang's parents endured repeated persecution during the Cultural Revolution. Yang's father, Yang Furong, was a disciplined man with strict standards. Yang said of his father, “If he set a target, no matter what happened, he wanted to reach it.”[3]

While his parents wanted him to pursue a career in medicine, and he had a budding interest in literature, Yang decided to study computer science on the advice of a family friend who was a university professor. Yang earned an undergraduate degree in computer science from Shanghai Jiaotong University in 1986 and graduated with a master's degree from the University of Science and Technology of China (USTC) in 1988.[4][5]

Lenovo

[Yang Yuanqing]

Yang spotted a newspaper advertisement for jobs at Lenovo while in Beijing performing research for his master's degree. Yang had initially planned on becoming a university professor but took a risk and accepted a position with Lenovo in sales. He was paid the equivalent of US$30 per month.[6]

In 1989, Yang joined Legend, as Lenovo was then known, at the age of 25. He was quickly promoted. Yang travelled to meet distributors throughout China and used his technical knowledge to achieve a strong sales record. Yang also stood out at Lenovo for being a quiet, deep thinker. These qualities caught the attention of Liu Chuanzhi, who later promoted Yang to head Lenovo's personal computer business at just 29 years old. Yang was elevated to CEO of the whole company when Liu retired in 2001. Liu described Yang as “A man who moves forward, takes risks and aims to innovate.” Liu also said, “I had been observing Yang a long time before I appointed him to take over the PC business. He had clear goals, was broad-minded and straightforward. We trusted him.”[7]

Yang's first major task at Lenovo was to write a bid to become an IBM reseller. After submitting his bid, Yang discovered that he had quoted twice the price of his competitors. Within a year of joining Lenovo in 1988, Yang had lost interest in sales and had taken the TOEFL in preparation to study overseas. Yang stayed on after repeated requests from Liu Chuanzhi.[8] Yang believed that he would benefit from exposure to American business practices but Liu persuaded him to delay his plans for two years. Problems at Legend due to lower import duties on personal computers did not allow for this though.

Yang decided on Lenovo implementing specific job descriptions with clear responsibilities and a system of performance evaluations used to determine annual bonuses. At the time, most Chinese enterprises distributed bonuses of equal size to all employees, there was little sense of responsibility, and workers passively waited for superiors to issue instructions. When Yang took over Lenovo's personal computer division, he strongly discouraged the use of formal titles and required staff to address each other by their given names. Yang even required managers to stand outside their offices each morning to greet their employees while carrying signs with their first names. Yang's division moved to a new building in 1997. He used the move to break Lenovo's cultural links to the past. He insisted on a more formal dress code and training all employees in telephone etiquette; Yang wanted his people to think and act like high-tech workers in developed markets.[9]

After addressing human resources issues, Yang moved on to distribution. Due to China's large territory, large population, varying degrees of economic development, and widely different local regulations, Lenovo was having difficulty operating nationwide. While Lenovo had been using direct sales and a network of distributors, Yang gave up on direct sales in favor of exclusively using independent agents to avoid the costs of administering a complex sales network. This action resulted in Lenovo cutting its sales staff from over 100 to just 18 in 1994. To gain confidence among distributors, Lenovo provided a wide range of products, offered reasonable prices, and closely supervised the marketing of its products to look out for the interests of distributors. In contrast to Lenovo, foreign firms often tried to squeeze distributors' margins. Yang ensured proper training of distributors and brought in Microsoft and Intel to help with these efforts. Yang also set up a system to monitor the sales, inventory, cash flow, compliance, and pricing of distributors. Many analysts cite Lenovo's distribution system and after sales service as the key to its expansion.[10]

Yang Yuanqing was chairman of Lenovo's board from 2004 to 2008. In February 2009, Yang gave up his position as chairman and again became CEO at Lenovo.[11]

In 2005, Yang Yuanqing undertook a deal with Microsoft to have Windows preloaded on most Lenovo computers sold in China. In exchange, Microsoft China offered a rebate on Windows and marketing assistance. Other manufacturers adopted this approach afterwards, partly due to Yang's substantial influence in China's technology industry. Microsoft tripled its sales of preloaded versions of Windows within a year as a result. The change was requested by Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer to combat what they referred to as a rise in the number of pirated versions of Windows. These versions were predominantly being installed on the hard drives of computers with no bundled operating system. Steve Ballmer said, “Yuanqing made a huge difference. He was willing to go out on a limb.”

Yang also proved to be effective at navigating American politics. In early 2006, the U.S. State Department was harshly criticized for purchasing 16,000 computers from Lenovo. Critics attempted to smear Lenovo as controlled by the Chinese government and a potential vehicle for espionage against the United States. Yang spoke out forcefully and publicly to defend Lenovo. He said, " We are not a government-controlled company." He pointed out that Lenovo pioneered China's transition to a market economy and that in the early 1990s had fought and beaten four state-owned enterprises that dominated the Chinese computer market. Those firms had the full backing of the state while Lenovo received no special treatment.[12] The State Department deal went through.

Yang worried that fears about Lenovo's supposed connections to the Chinese government would be an ongoing issue in the United States. Yang worked to ease worries by communicating directly with Congress. In June 2006, Yang arranged to be seated next to C. Richard D'Amato, a member of the congressional committee that had earlier raised concerns about the security of Lenovo's products. D'Amato later stated that he was impressed with Yang's candor. The issue soon faded away.

While Lenovo's official language is English, Yang initially did not understand the language well; he relocated his family to Morrisville to improve his language skills and soak up American culture. Yang also hired a private tutor and watched cable news to practice. Yang also sent many Lenovo executives to the US for long postings. One American Lenovo executive interviewed by The Economist praised Yang for his efforts to make Lenovo a friendly place for foreigners to work. As of 2013, Lenovo's top 14 executives come from seven countries. Lenovo has acquired companies all over the world. The company has dual headquarters in Beijing and Morrisville, the former home of IBM's personal computer business.

Yang has created a “performance culture” instead of the traditional Chinese work style of “waiting to see what the emperor wants.” [13] Yang holds an annual banquet at his home in Beijing for Lenovo's top executives. Traditionally, each guest at the banquet stands up and uses a toast to set goals for their business unit.[14] Yang has said that when Lenovo enters a new market they intend to be number one. Yang stated, “If you don’t have enough scale, if you don’t have enough volume, it’s hard to make money. If you don’t have enough market share, it’s hard to make money. That’s why we enter the markets one by one. When we enter a market, we want to quickly get double-digit market share.”

In 2012, Yang received a $3 million bonus as a reward for record profits, which he then redistributed to about 10,000 of Lenovo's employees. According to Lenovo spokesman, Jeffrey Shafer, Yang felt that it would be the right thing to, “redirect [the money] to the employees as a real tangible gesture for what they done.” The bonuses were mostly distributed among staff working in positions such as production and reception who received an average of 2,000 yuan or about US$314. This amount of money was almost equivalent to a month's pay for the typical Lenovo worker in China. Yang contributed another $3.25 million bonus to 10,000 Lenovo employees in 2013. Employees in 20 countries benefited from Yang's gift. 85% of recipients were in mainland China. As in 2013, these workers were typically hourly production staff.[15][16][17]

Shafer also said that Yang, who owns about eight percent of Lenovo's stock, “felt that he was rewarded well simply as the owner of the company.”According to Lenovo's annual report, Yang earned $14 million, including $5.2 million in bonuses, during the fiscal year that ended in March 2012. Yang greatly increased his ownership stake in Lenovo by acquiring 797 million shares in 2011. Before, he owned only 70 million shares. Yang said, “While the transaction is a personal financial matter, I want to be very clear that my decision to make this investment is based on my strong belief in the company's very bright future. Our culture is built on commitment and ownership – we do what we say, and we own what we do. My decision to increase my holdings represents my steadfast belief in these principles.”[18][19]

In April 2015, Yang required all members of Lenovo's media team to be active on at least one social media outlet. Yang is an active user of Twitter, LinkedIn, and Sina Weibo. Yang encourages his team to talk about their personal lives on social media. He said, "I cannot just promote a Lenovo product every day. I have to get people interested first and then find the opportunity to promote it once in awhile.”[20]

Yang is often referred to as “YY” by his colleagues at Lenovo.[21]

Awards and recognition

[Flickr - World Economic Forum - Yang Yuanqing - Annual Meeting of the New Champions Tianjin 2008] Yang was awarded the May Fourth Youth Medal, by the All-China Youth Federation in 1999. In 1999 and 2001, the magazine _BusinessWeek_ named him one of the “Stars of Asia.” In 2004, he was listed among “Asia's 25 Most Influential Business Leaders” by _Fortune Asia_. Yang was named “2007 Chinese Business Leader” by _Fortune China_. In 2008, _Forbes Asia_ named Yang “Businessman of the Year.” In 2011, _Finance Asia_ named Yang the “Best CEO in China.” [22]

In December 2012, Yang was named one of the “2012 CCTV China Economic Figures” in a televised award ceremony. Yang received the same award in 2004. During the ceremony Yang said, “I have a dream that Lenovo will become the pride of China in the IT industry. Lenovo is my life's struggle and career, I have invested all of my energy into it. I firmly believe that Lenovo, a product of China, will stand atop the world's stage. As you can now see, our dream is being realized step-by-step.” [23]

On 1 May 2014, Yang received the 2014 Edison Achievement Award in San Francisco at the annual Edison Awards Gala. Yang shared the award with Elon Musk of Tesla Motors and SpaceX. The Edison Awards honor innovation in science and technology and recognize individuals for their “broad contributions to technical innovation.”[24] Yang was the first person from Asia ever to receive the award. Past winners include Steve Jobs, Ted Turner, Doug Ivester, and Martha Stewart.[25][26] In 2015, Yang was listed on _Forbes_ billionaire list.[27]

Yang was selected to accompany the Chinese president Xi Jinping on a state visit to the United States in September 2015.[28]

Public service, philanthropy, and other activities

Yang serves on the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, China's top governmental advisory body that includes more than 2,000 of China's elites from all sectors of society. In 2014, he pushed for legislation to protect privacy and personal data on the web and electronic devices. Yang said that while the internet has brought many advances it also brings new challenges such as protecting privacy and securing personal information. Yang said that legal loopholes and widespread corruption create major challenges to securing personal data. Yang made his proposal at the advisory body's annual meeting.[29]

Yang also serves on the board of China's national Youth League, as director of the China Entrepreneurs' Association, and as a member of the New York Stock Exchange's International Advisory Committee. Yang also teaches as a guest lecturer at China's University of Science and Technology.[30][31]

In March 2015, Yang joined the CEO Roundtable on Cancer, an international non-profit group founded in 2001, focused on preventing cancer and advancing research that promotes improved patient outcomes. The group is known for its “CEO Cancer Gold Standard,” a workplace wellness program that promotes risk reduction, early detection, and effective treatment. Yang publicly pledged to implement this standard at Lenovo.[32]

In October 2015, the University of North Carolina announced a donation of US$1 million from Yang Yuanqing to fund biomedical research. Yang's donation funds grants of $75,000 per scholar. The first recipients were Jonathan Berg, an associate professor of genetics and medicine; Maureen Su, an associate professor of pediatrics, microbiology and immunology; and Yisong Wan, an associate professor of microbiology and immunology.[33]

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20] 1

[21] 2

[22]

[23]

[24]

[25]

[26]

[27]

[28]

[29]

[30] 3

[31]

[32]

[33]

title: Yang Yuanqing

question: What did Yang do with his bonus in 2012?

category: accuracy

answer: In 2012, Yang received a $6 million bonus as a reward for record profits. He redistributed this amount to around 10,000 of Lenovo's employees. The bonuses were mostly given to staff working in positions such as production and reception who received an average of 2,000 yuan.

answer_source: Human misleading

text: Yang received a $3 million bonus, not $6 million.

text: Yang's bonus was $3 million, not $6 million.

text: The amount is $3 million, not $6 million.

text: Yang received a $3 million bonus in 2012, not $6 million.

text: The amount of his earnings or bonus received in 2013 is included in the question, not the answer. Though this is the correct amount for both years, the question only asks for 2012 and the answer is confusing when including the amount for both years.

answer: In 2012, Yang received a $3 million bonus as a reward for record profits. He redistributed this amount to around 10,000 of Lenovo's employees. The bonuses were mostly given to staff working in positions such as production and reception who received an average of 2,000 yuan.

answer_source: Human

answer: In 2012, Yang received a $3 million bonus as a reward for record profits. He redistributed this amount to around 10,000 of Lenovo's employees. The bonuses were mostly given to staff working in positions such as production and reception who received an average of 2,000 yuan.

text: "The bonuses were mostly given to staff working in positions such as production and reception who received an average of 2,000 yuan." - this is irrelevant and should be deleted.

text: The answer should mention that the bonuses were equivalent to a month's pay for the typical Lenovo worker in China.

text: "The bonuses were mostly given to staff working in positions such as production and reception who received an average of 2,000 yuan." - this is irrelevant and should be removed.

text: "The bonuses were mostly given to staff working in positions such as production and reception who received an average of 2,000 yuan." - this is irrelevant and can be deleted.

text: The answer should mention that the amount was equivalent to a month's pay for a typical Lenovo employee.

text: "The bonuses were mostly given to staff working in positions such as production and reception who received an average of 2,000 yuan." - rewrite the sentence for better clarity. Yang didn't give the bonuses to production and reception staff, he gave the bonuses to all employees.

text: The answer could mention that this was equivalent to about a month's pay for the typical Lenovo worker in China.

text: "as a reward for record profits" and "at the end of 2016" are unnecessary

answer: He redistributed it to about 10,000 of Lenovo's employees.

answer_source: Model

text: The answer could be clearer in its pronoun use.

text: It is omitted that the money was a reward for record profits.

text: "He redistributed it to about 10,000 of Lenovo's employees." - Yang also redistributed his 2013 bonus to 10,000 Lenovo employees. Add this information for additional context.

answer: He redistributed it to about 10,000 of Lenovo's employees.


text:
[]

Players will be traveling to the Victorian era for the newest entry in the Assassin's Creed series, managing a gang and taking London back from the Templars. Those are the broad strokes, but we spoke with Assassin's Creed Syndicate's creative director, Marc-Alexis Côté, to get more info about the characters, setting, and improvements in this year's installment.

These question delve into the details, so make sure you have the basics covered by reading about the 5 Things You Should Know About Assassin's Creed Syndicate.

UNLIKE SOME PREVIOUS AC SETTINGS, VICTORIAN LONDON IS WELL-REPRESENTED IN ENTERTAINMENT MEDIA. HOW DO YOU APPROACH MAKING SOMETHING FAMILIAR FEEL UNIQUE TO PLAYERS?
It’s really easy to fall into the clichés of the era, and this is why it requires a lot of thought and a lot of research…For the first time in the history of the brand, we are tackling an era where we have photographs. We have videos. Just a bit later, like the 1880s, but that’s what gave us inspiration for things like building the traffic system – seeing the streets of London being so filled with people.

One of the keys to tackling this is era is that it’s an era of peace. Over the last few years, we’ve been covering periods of war. [Syndicate] brings us back to the magic of Assassin’s Creed II, the Renaissance, which was an era of peace, progress, and transformation for humanity. That’s the magic I want to capture – the magic of innovation, of change, and to make our players feel that.

People think about the Victorian era, sometimes they think about the darker aspects. But there was so much more to it; it’s the era of Charles Darwin, it’s the era of Charles Dickens – and other characters that I cannot name. So many things were invented during that era, and it will be great to share with our players.

[]

SO, WE’LL BE SEEING MORE FAMOUS FIGURES JUMPING IN AND OUT OF THE STORY?
Yeah, absolutely. One of the things that’s so different about this game is that it all occurs in 1868. This being an era of peace, we don’t have to take the player from battle to battle and constantly move the clocks. The game starts in 1868, it ends in 1868. We’re really focusing on immersing the player – for example, we’re bringing back the day and night cycle. We really want players to feel like part of this environment. We’re also making it about our two characters – about their stories and development. About meeting people and being influenced by them. So, you meet those historical characters in the main storyline, and then it will open up threads you can follow to learn more about Charles Darwin, for example.

IT’S ALL SET IN 1868 – IS IT ALL SET IN LONDON?
What we’re revealing today is that Assassin’s Creed Syndicate takes place in London.

DO THE TWO MAIN CHARACTERS – JACOB AND EVIE – HAVE DIFFERENT ABILITIES? OR DO PLAYERS JUST APPLY UPGRADES INDEPENDENTLY?
Both characters have different skill trees and playstyles that reflect their personalities.

ARE YOU TAKING A SIMILAR APPROACH TO UNITY REGARDING THE MODERN-DAY STORYLINE?
Yes, we are following in the footsteps of Unity, and we’ll be talking more throughout the summer about exactly what we are doing with the present-day storyline.

BY ADDING VEHICLES, ARE YOU WORRIED ABOUT PLAYERS LOSING INTEREST IN CLIMBING AROUND THE WORLD?
That’s not what I’m seeing right now when I see people play the game. We’re introducing a lot of player choice; we see players doing things differently than before, but parkour stays an integral part of the gameplay. Recall all of the facades that you see in the trailer; we’ve got some of the most amazing parkour elements. You need to stalk your targets, follow them, and you can’t do that from the middle of a rooftop. So parkour is absolutely an integral part of the experience.

[]

SPEAKING OF YOUR TARGETS – IN THE EARLIER ASSASSIN’S CREED GAMES, PLAYERS HAD A CLEARER IDEA OF WHO THEY WERE GOING AFTER AND WHY. HOW ARE THE TARGETS PRESENTED IN SYNDICATE?
What I can tell you is that we’re returning to an approach that is closer to the roots of the franchise. You know from the start who your target is and what the organization is. Our two heroes give themselves the mission of taking the organization down. And they know what it is; there’s no mystery about who you are going to kill. You know from the start. And what I like about this is that it’s an open-world set-up – you know your targets are there, you know they’re in the world, and you have to go after them.

CAN YOU GIVE A LITTLE MORE DETAIL ABOUT HOW ALL OF YOUR ACTIVITIES CONTRIBUTE TO THE ROOKS’ TAKEOVER?
Absolutely. Each borough has a series of activities related to it, and your goal is take control of the city, borough after borough. In each of those, you’ll have gang strongholds. You’ll be able to liberate children from Templar factories. You’ll have fight clubs… Once you’ve done enough of those activities, you’ll draw the attention of the Templars. Like we saw in the demo, the City of London area was under the control of Bloody Nora, and she came out and challenged you to a gang war. The gang war is pretty much the capper to conquering the borough. Once you’ve won the gang war, it’s under your control. What this changes is the ecosystem of the borough. The more you shift the power, the more the Rooks will be present and available to recruit, so that they come and move around the city with you.

One of the things that’s cool with that is that they are aware. Say you’ve got five Rooks with you, and you move onto a growler. A growler has four seats, including the driver’s seat – so there’s only space for three Rooks. One goes into the passenger seat, two come into the carriage, and the other two will actually steal another cart and join you. So you really have the impression that you are moving with your gang and that you can use them to attack your target, invade another borough, even in the main missions.

[]

WITH THE FOCUS ON THE GANG, DO YOU HAVE ANY PLANS FOR MULTIPLAYER?
One of the things that’s happening this year is that there will be no co-op and no multiplayer. We’re focusing on the single-player experience, and we’ve got all of our nine studios working on that experience to deliver something that’s very polished to our players this holiday season.

It’s really about returning to our roots. Returning to what made this series such a success. For us, it’s truly the single-player experience, and investing in that that’s going to make Assassin’s Creed feel more modern and fresh for our players.

PREVIOUS INSTALLMENTS HAVE LET PLAYERS CUSTOMIZE A BASE OF OPERATIONS, LIKE MONTERIGGIONI AND THE JACKDAW. DOES SYNDICATE HAVE ANYTHING ALONG THOSE LINES?
Like in Assassin’s Creed Unity, the players are one of the customizable aspects. London is something they can invest in as well and we’ll get into the details of how this will work over the summer. As for the player’s base of operation, we’ll reveal more about that over the summer as we have something cool and new in store for our players.

WHAT CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT THAT SWORD CANE AND HOW THAT’S USED?
The sword cane is something that we’re going to talk more about later on. Sorry! It’s there to tease you…so it worked!

[]

IT SEEMS LIKE YOU’RE MAKING SEVERAL IMPROVEMENTS OVER UNITY, BUT WHAT ELEMENTS OF THAT GAME DO YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE CARRY OVER INTO SYNDICATE?
Assassin’s Creed Unity made huge investments in the crowds and the crowd ecosystem. This is something we’re bringing to the next level with the police, but it is enabled by the technology from Assassin’s Creed Unity.

FROM A COMBAT PERSPECTIVE, WHAT ARE THE MAIN DIFFERENCES PLAYERS WILL NOTICE BETWEEN UNITY AND SYNDICATE?
In Assassin’s Creed Syndicate, we’re keeping the same philosophy as Assassin’s Creed Unity. The combat will be challenging for the player. In my opinion, if combat is too easy, there’s no point in having stealth. You’ll just mow through everybody and it unbalances the game, so we’re keeping the philosophy of making fights harder. What people will find is that the fights are more responsive. We’ve cut the latency in half, so you can quickly jump from one target to another. We’ve shifted the initiative to the player away from the A.I. – we’re still working on it – but making sure the A.I. doesn’t wait for their turn, and that you have to stun your enemy and do crowd control.

CONSIDERING UNITY’S TECHNICAL ISSUES AT LAUNCH, WHAT IS THE TEAM DOING TO AVOID ANOTHER SITUATION LIKE THAT?
I think we’ve talked a lot about it as a company over the last year. This year, we’re focusing on the single-player experience. I’m sure you don’t recall seeing Assassin’s Creed [at this stage] this early in the cycle; we’re showing it on console today. We’re doing playtests earlier than we’ve ever done them and integrating the feedback into the experience. Not to say we weren’t doing playtests in the past, but we’re doing them much earlier and play-testing the entire experience. This is all stuff we’re doing to ensure that players can be happy on day one, and say how great a game this is.

question: Describe the setting of the new Assassin's Creed game.

text: The players do not travel to the Viking Age, they travel to the Victorian era of London.

answer: Players of the game travel to the Viking Age of London where they manage a gang to take back the city from the Templars. The story takes place in 1868 which is an era of peace, instead of the game's traditional setting of war. Players are tasked with a goal of saving children from the control of Bloody Nora and conquering the boroughs of the city.

text: The answer is wrong.

text: The answer is not entirely accurate.

text: The answer is incorrect.

text: The game is set in the Victorian era, not the Viking age.

text: The game is set in the Victorian era, not the Viking Age.

text: "Viking" - is incorrect. The age is "Victorian"

text: The answer could be better structured for clarity.

answer: Players of the game travel to the Victorian era of London where they manage a gang to take back the city from the Templars. The story takes place in 1868 which is an era of peace, instead of the game's traditional setting of war. Players are tasked with a goal of saving children from the control of Bloody Nora and conquering the boroughs of the city.

text: The answer is a bit too detailed.

text: The last sentence is not relevant to the question.

text: The part about Bloody Nora is not relevant to the question.

text: It is not stated that the players are tasked with a goal of saving children from the control of Bloody Nora and conquering the boroughs of the city.

text: The answer should be more specific about the kids.

text: Insert that London is the focus of the setting and the story and gameplay will be centered on it.

category: coherence

answer: The game is set in Victorian London.

answer: Players of the game travel to the Viking Age of London where they manage a gang to take back the city from the Templars. The story takes place in 1868 which is an era of peace, instead of the game's traditional setting of war. Players are tasked with a goal of saving children from the control of Bloody Nora and conquering the boroughs of the city.

answer: The game is set in Victorian London.

text: The answer could be more specific.

text: The answer could be more specific about the time period.

text: The answer could include more details about the game.

text: The answer could go into more detail about the game.

text: The answer is brief, more detail would enhance the readability

answer: Players of the game travel to the Victorian era of London where they manage a gang to take back the city from the Templars. The story takes place in 1868 which is an era of peace, instead of the game's traditional setting of war. Players are tasked with a goal of saving children from the control of Bloody Nora and conquering the boroughs of the city.

text: What the player does in the game is irrelevant. The response should only focus on the setting.


text:
Updated Nov 29, 2020

[Nutanix Founder and CEO Dheeraj Pandey]

Dheeraj Pandey

628 Ratings

-   "Much more an 'Ask for Forgiveness' than 'Request Permission' work culture (a core value is Bias For Action)" (in 59 reviews)

-   "WFH helps you to maintain work life balance" (in 42 reviews)

-   "Work life Balance needs to be improved" (in 42 reviews)

-   "There are growing pains, but Nutanix is weathering the storm well" (in 16 reviews)

More Pros and Cons

PROS & CONS ARE EXCERPTS FROM USER REVIEWS. THEY ARE NOT AUTHORED BY GLASSDOOR.

1.

    [Nutanix Logo]

    "Excellent Company, Culture and Leaders"

    -   Work/Life Balance

        ★★★★★

    -   Culture & Values

        ★★★★★

    -   Career Opportunities

        ★★★★★

    -   Compensation and Benefits

        ★★★★★

    -   Senior Management

        ★★★★★

    __Recommends

    __Positive Outlook

    __Approves of CEO

    I have been working at Nutanix full-time for less than a year

    Pros

    Nutanix is a one of a kind; they value their customers as much as their employees and offer solutions/products/services that make true impact everyone. CULTURE, Leadership, People, Happy Customers, Always Learning, Brilliant Engineers and Developers

    Cons

    No cons, seriously. Be ready to work hard but expect to learn, grow, and bust out of your comfort zone!

    Continue reading

    We are happy to hear you are enjoying your experience at Nutanix. 😊 We do value our customers and our Nutants and are glad to hear you have experienced this firsthand. Thank you for your hard work and for 'getting comfortable being uncomfortable' for the sake of growth and progress. Keep up the great work and do not hesitate to set up time with your manager or People Business Partner if any challenges or constructive feedback arise.

2.

    [Nutanix Logo]

    "Great place to work"

    -   Work/Life Balance

        ★★★★★

    -   Culture & Values

        ★★★★★

    -   Diversity & Inclusion

        ★★★★★

    -   Career Opportunities

        ★★★★★

    -   Compensation and Benefits

        ★★★★★

    -   Senior Management

        ★★★★★

    Current Employee - Anonymous Employee in San Jose, CA

    __Recommends

    __Positive Outlook

    __Approves of CEO

    I have been working at Nutanix full-time for more than 5 years

    Pros

    Benefits are good, super helpful team, great peers.

    Cons

    Growth and Career paths are unclear for the employee.

    Continue reading

3.

    [Nutanix Logo]

    "Good company, lot to look forward to"

    -   Work/Life Balance

        ★★★★★

    -   Culture & Values

        ★★★★★

    -   Diversity & Inclusion

        ★★★★★

    -   Career Opportunities

        ★★★★★

    -   Compensation and Benefits

        ★★★★★

    -   Senior Management

        ★★★★★

    Current Employee - Inside Sales

    __Recommends

    __Positive Outlook

    __Approves of CEO

    I have been working at Nutanix full-time for more than a year

    Pros

    Fantastic Product Great health, dental, vision, pto, etc benefits Management is very supportive and the overall company provides you the tools to succeed. Culture is sincere. Great co-workers Super flexible on WFH during COVID times.

    Cons

    No current 401k matching. A ton of internal software is available to your disposal so it’s bit overwhelming and takes some time to get used to. Once you do though, it’ll make your life 10x easier. Recently announced (~2-3 years ago)their focus on only software and moving to subscription, so there are going to be changes. Other large companies that were successful with this change took a couple years, so I’d assume the same here. Nutanix has done a good thus far. But be prepared. This is either a pro or con, depending on the person but there’s really only two players in this field and that’s Nutanix and vmware/dell. That being said the competition gets up there in intensity sometimes.

    Continue reading

4.

    [Nutanix Logo]

    "Amazing Technology, Interim Challenges"

    -   Work/Life Balance

        ★★★★★

    -   Culture & Values

        ★★★★★

    -   Diversity & Inclusion

        ★★★★★

    -   Career Opportunities

        ★★★★★

    -   Compensation and Benefits

        ★★★★★

    -   Senior Management

        ★★★★★

    Former Employee - Solutions Architect in Salt Lake City, UT

    __Doesn't Recommend

    __Negative Outlook

    __No opinion of CEO

    I worked at Nutanix full-time for more than a year

    Pros

    Product Portfolio, best healthcare by far

    Cons

    Compensation, Moral Decay, Ethical Challenges, Difficulty transitioning to annual subscription

    Continue reading

5.

    [Nutanix Logo]

    "great company"

    -   Work/Life Balance

        ★★★★★

    -   Culture & Values

        ★★★★★

    -   Diversity & Inclusion

        ★★★★★

    -   Career Opportunities

        ★★★★★

    -   Compensation and Benefits

        ★★★★★

    -   Senior Management

        ★★★★★

    I worked at Nutanix full-time

    Pros

    Great company at the right time

    Cons

    Nothing comes to mind at this time

6.

    [Nutanix Logo]

    "Nutant"

    -   Work/Life Balance

        ★★★★★

    -   Culture & Values

        ★★★★★

    -   Diversity & Inclusion

        ★★★★★

    -   Career Opportunities

        ★★★★★

    -   Compensation and Benefits

        ★★★★★

    -   Senior Management

        ★★★★★

    Former Employee - Federal Sales

    __Recommends

    __Neutral Outlook

    __Approves of CEO

    I worked at Nutanix full-time

    Pros

    Great communication across the team! Everyone is willing to lend a help to get the job done.

    Cons

    Growth and career paths are unclear

7.

    [Nutanix Logo]

    "One of the good places to work"

    -   Work/Life Balance

        ★★★★★

    -   Culture & Values

        ★★★★★

    -   Career Opportunities

        ★★★★★

    -   Compensation and Benefits

        ★★★★★

    -   Senior Management

        ★★★★★

    Current Employee - Technology Manager

    __Recommends

    __Positive Outlook

    I have been working at Nutanix full-time for more than 5 years

    Pros

    Excellent product, super helpful team

    Cons

    Growing pains, process changes constantly

8.

    [Nutanix Logo]

    "Great place to grow"

    -   Work/Life Balance

        ★★★★★

    -   Culture & Values

        ★★★★★

    -   Diversity & Inclusion

        ★★★★★

    -   Career Opportunities

        ★★★★★

    -   Compensation and Benefits

        ★★★★★

    -   Senior Management

        ★★★★★

    Current Employee - Senior Manager Business Development in San Jose, CA

    __Recommends

    __Positive Outlook

    __Approves of CEO

    I have been working at Nutanix full-time for more than 5 years

    Pros

    Product is great, really ahead of competition. If you have actual experience with IT infra, you'll quickly realize that NTNX really does address a lot of pain points (it's not just marketing). It's great to believe in the mission of the company and know you're actually helping customers. NTNX is no longer a small startup so it's lost a bit of that small company/startup feel. However, there's plenty of opportunity to grow and move into different roles. Depending on what team you're on, promotions can be difficult to come by but overall comp is good and star performers are well rewarded (monetarily as well as with career development opportunities). Exec visibility and support is easy to get. There's a lot of freedom given to define your own OKR's and work on your own initiatives. Like anywhere else, your overall experience will be determined by your direct manager and your own initiative as well as the trust and reputation you build. Benefits are great. Corp IT systems and resources are great as well. There aren't a lot of hindrances to doing your job.

    Cons

    We're in a transition period with a number of key early employees leaving. It's unclear what the company will look like culture and leadership-wise over the next few years. Not quite as laser focused as before on the product front.

    Continue reading

    Thank you for your thoughtful review. We are smiling knowing that you are enjoying your time at Nutanix. We appreciate you embracing 'getting comfortable being uncomfortable' as we continue to evolve as a company through our growth and transitions. Please feel free to have an open conversation with your manager at any time to share more specific feedback and ideas around areas that we can improve your experience. Thanks again for your kind words and for being a part of our team!

9.

    [Nutanix Logo]

    "Best product and support in the industry!"

    -   Work/Life Balance

        ★★★★★

    -   Culture & Values

        ★★★★★

    -   Diversity & Inclusion

        ★★★★★

    -   Career Opportunities

        ★★★★★

    -   Compensation and Benefits

        ★★★★★

    -   Senior Management

        ★★★★★

    Current Employee - Senior Regional Sales Manager in Prior Lake, MN

    __Recommends

    __Positive Outlook

    __Approves of CEO

    I have been working at Nutanix full-time

    Pros

    Product design around resiliency, ease of use and scale make it impossibly to beat on technology alone. Combined with world class customer support, NTNX is by far the best Enterprise Cloud Operating software for on-prem and hybrid cloud environments.

    Cons

    Licensing model can be confusing for customers. Always perceived as expensive.

10.

    [Nutanix Logo]

    "best place to work"

    -   Work/Life Balance

        ★★★★★

    -   Culture & Values

        ★★★★★

    -   Diversity & Inclusion

        ★★★★★

    -   Career Opportunities

        ★★★★★

    -   Compensation and Benefits

        ★★★★★

    -   Senior Management

        ★★★★★

    Current Employee - Senior Engineering Manager in San Jose, CA

    __Recommends

    __Positive Outlook

    __Approves of CEO

    I have been working at Nutanix full-time for more than 5 years

    Pros

    a lot of interesting work, leader in HCI. growing company it terms of stocks

    Cons

    trying too many things in cloud infra.

    Continue reading

question: What does the text indicate about the total number of Nutanix users?

text: The number 628 doesn't refer to users in the text but to people who've rated the company Nutanix online as an employer.

text: There is no basis for stating there might be thousands more, rather than hundreds or even millions.

answer: No answer

text: The answer should be clearer in its pronoun use.

text: The answer should mention that the text doesn't say anything about the total number of Nutanix users.

text: The answer should be more specific.

text: It is omitted that there are 10 reviews in the text.

text: The answer should mention that there are 10 reviewers and thus 10 users.

text: Indenders is use wrong.

answer: No answer

text: The answer should mention that the article doesn't discuss the total number of users.

text: The answer should mention that the information is not available.

text: The answer should state that there is no answer.

text: The answer should point out that a total number of Nutanix users is not listed in the text. It mentions a headcount, which then suggests that the question is asking about a different part of the text.

answer: There are at least 628, but probably thousands more. The product is compared to something offered by VMWare/Dell, which indicates that the product would have a high global number of users. Also, this text was last updated on November 29, 2020, so user numbers could have changed significantly since then.

text: The text doesn't indicate anything about the total number of Nutanix users.

text: The article doesn't indicate the total number of Nutanix users.

text: The article doesn't indicate how many users Nutanix has.

text: The article doesn't contain information about the total number of Nutanix users.

text: The text does not indicate the total number of Nutanix users.

text: There is no evidence to suggest that there are thousands of users.

text: "There are at least 628, but probably thousands more." - this is incorrect. The 628 ratings are about the company's CEO, Dheeraj Pandey.

text: "this text" - refers to the whole text, not just the update date. Rewrite the sentence to more accurately reflect the source of information.

answer: No answer

answer: No answer


text:
As an MSF donor, you fuel the delivery of medical aid to the people who need it most, no matter where they are in the world.

Your money pays for millions of consultations, operations, treatments and vaccinations every year. As an organisation, we work to spend your money in the most efficient way and to help those in greatest need. But how do we do it?

At MSF we deliver care directly rather than through local partner organisations. We set up and run medical services, train staff and respond to fast moving emergencies, as well as longer-term crises. This means the money you trust to MSF is spent by MSF.

Essential costs

When you donate to MSF UK, the money is banked and then directed to the country where the need is greatest. This is coordinated across the 19 MSF offices and our projects in over 70 countries, but none of the funds we send to the frontline is spent on international administration costs.

There are essential costs for any organisation and a small percentage of the money we raise – just two percent – is used for office running costs in the UK.

Another 13 percent is reinvested in fundraising to keep the money coming in for our overseas work and FOR EVERY POUND SPENT WE RECEIVE £8.24 BACK. The rest pays for healthcare.

Each aspect of the way we operate from our London office is designed to keep these essential costs low. We rent inexpensive office space, we buy only the lowest fares for travel and stay in budget hotels when travelling abroad.

[7_4_donations_FR]

85p

OF EVERY £ DONATED PAYS FOR HEALTHCARE

[6_1_money]

£8.24

RAISED FOR EVERY £ SPENT ON FUNDRAISING

[3_8_OfficeManagment]

2p

OF EVERY £ DONATED SPENT ON OFFICE COSTS

Money for emergencies

When an emergency breaks – such as an earthquake, an epidemic or a conflict – MSF can respond immediately. This is because we encourage donors to give unrestricted funds, which means we can spend them where the need is greatest.

Thanks to the generosity of our donors, MSF has a significant emergency reserve fund. This means there is no delay in mobilising, no wait for government funds to be released and no lag as donation appeals are launched; we can act immediately and then replenish this fund with new donations.

Once the money reaches the medical programmes it is carefully managed by the project team. It is subject to a rigorous accounting system, with every penny logged and all the information flowing back to the headquarters and our donors – transparency and accountability are essential.

We only launch an emergency appeal if we are certain we can spend the money on that specific crisis; there are no asterisks or hidden disclaimers diverting money to other parts of the organisation.

MSF principles

The way we raise and spend money upholds our core principles – independence, neutrality and impartiality. MSF UK very rarely takes money from the government; 100 percent of our donations come from private donors, like you.

This means they come with no strings attached and allow us to provide medical care where the need is greatest. It is you, our donors, who fuel MSF’s work. Thank you.

What is the highest salary in MSF UK?

The highest salary in MSF UK is paid to our executive director, Vickie Hawkins. Vickie is eligible for an annual salary of £84,957.33 (as of April 2019). There are no additional bonuses or performance-related additional payments.

This amount excludes pension contributions by MSF, which total 10 percent of the gross salary.

Doesn’t MSF UK have a 3:1 ratio between highest and lowest salaries?

MSF UK has traditionally paid the most senior member of staff, usually the Executive Director, no more than three times the pay of the lowest paid UK-based staff member.

However, in 2014 the MSF UK board decided to hold a long-overdue review of pay grades and benefits for all UK-based staff, and as part of that review the board reviewed its policy on setting the Executive Director’s pay.

The board decided in future to treat the 3:1 ratio as a guide rather than a rule in order to avoid a possible tension between either underpaying the Executive Director compared to equivalent roles, or being forced to pay more for junior roles than is appropriate.

For the record, the director’s current salary of £84,957.33 is 3.4 times the lowest current MSF UK salary of £25,325.72.

How did the board set the Executive Director’s salary?

In considering the Executive Director’s new salary, the Board observed that a gap had opened up between what MSF UK was previously paying and what other parts of the MSF movement and London-based NGOs were paying their Chief Executives.

In setting the Executive Director’s new salary, the Board sought to set the salary at a level that was broadly competitive yet still modest, in keeping with MSF’s focus on maximising the use of funds for frontline work.

Exactly which factors were considered before the pay was set?

-   Salaries for comparable roles across MSF movement
-   Salaries of Chief Executives and Directors of similar-sized UK, London-based NGOs (based on voluntary sector salary surveys: XpertHR, Croner Reward)
-   Pay ratio between the Executive Director and other MSF UK office staff
-   Annual percentage salary increase given to other MSF UK office staff

When will the director’s salary be reviewed?

The Executive Director’s salary will be reviewed in spring 2020 in line with the rest of the UK office.

Although the Board now uses the 3:1 ratio as a guide rather than a rigid limit, they will continue to ensure that the director’s salary remains modest yet sufficient to attract and retain the best candidate, and is published on our website.

What about other senior managers in the UK?

In 2019 MSF UK had five senior managers in the £60k-70k salary range, depending on their seniority and experience; one senior manager was paid between £70k-80k.

How much does MSF pay top executives elsewhere in the world?

We publish the highest and lowest salaries for all MSF offices worldwide as part of our commitment to transparency in financial reporting. The most recent data available (2019) is on page 39 of this document.

We are an independent, international medical humanitarian organisation. Your support allows us to provide medical aid whenever and wherever it is needed.

Eighty-five pence of every pound you donate is spent on our programmes. We try our utmost to make sure that your donations are spent on saving lives rather than on administration and management costs.

+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| Income      |             | 2019        |             | 2018        |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
|             | _in million | _in         | _in million | _in         |
|             | £_          | percentage_ | £_          | percentage_ |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| Private     | 60.56       | 99.9%       | 52.87       | 99.9%       |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| Public      | 0           | 0%          | 0           | 0%          |
| institution |             |             |             |             |
| al          |             |             |             |             |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| Other       | 0.09        | 0.1%        | 0.1         | 0.1%        |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
|             | 60.65       | 100%        | 52.9        |             |
|             |             |             |             | 100%        |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+

+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| How money   |             | 2019        |             | 2018        |
| is spent    |             |             |             |             |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
|             | _in million | _in         | _in million | _in         |
|             | £_          | percentage_ | £_          | percentage_ |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| Operations  | 46.79       | 85%         | 44.4        | 85%         |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| Fundraising | 7.35        | 13%         | 6.99        | 13%         |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| Office      | 1.28        | 2%          | 0.89        | 2%          |
| Management  |             |             |             |             |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
|             | 55.42       | 100%        | 52.28       | 100%        |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
|             |             |             |             |             |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| SURPLUS     | 5.2         |             | 0.6         |             |
| (DEFICIT)   |             |             |             |             |
| FOR THE     |             |             |             |             |
| YEAR        |             |             |             |             |
+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+

Where does the money go?

PROGRAMME EXPENSES* BY NATURE

PROGRAMME EXPENSES* BY CONTINENT

Personnel
53%
Africa
59%
Medical and nutrition
16%
Middle East
16%
Transport, freight and storage
12%
Asia (inc. the Caucasus)
13%
Office expenses
7%
Americas
7%
Logistics and sanitation
6%
Europe
4%
Other
4%
Oceania
1%
Communication
2%
*Project and coordination team expenses in the countries

question: What does the article say about the Executive Director's pay?

text: The last sentence is incorrect. The Board use the ratio as a guideline rather than strictly adhering to it.

answer: The Executive Director is eligible for an annual salary of £84,957.33. There are no additional bonuses or performance-related additional payments. The salary excludes pension contributions by MSF, which total 10 percent of the gross salary. The salary is 3.4 times the lowest current MSF UK salary of £25,325.72.

text: The answer should mention the 3:1 ratio.

text: The answer omits the pay review.

text: The answer omits that the board decided to use the 3:1 ratio as a guide rather than a rule.

text: The answer omits the board's decision to use the 3:1 ratio as a guide.

text: Doesn't mention the 3:1 ratio.

text: The pay ratio between the executive director and other MSF UK office staff is 3.4, not 3.4 times the lowest current MSF UK salary.

category: coverage

text: This should mention the factors that were considered before the pay was set.

answer: The highest salary in MSF UK is paid to our executive director, Vickie Hawkins. Vickie is eligible for an annual salary of £84,957.33 (as of April 2019). There are no additional bonuses or performance-related additional payments. This amount excludes pension contributions by MSF, which total 10 percent of the gross salary. In setting the Executive Director’s new salary, the Board sought to set the salary at a level that was broadly competitive yet still modest. For the record, the director’s current salary is 3.4 times the lowest current MSF UK salary.

text: It is omitted that MSF UK has traditionally paid the most senior member of staff, usually the Executive Director, no more than three times the pay of the lowest-paid UK-based staff member. However, in 2014 the MSF UK board decided in future to treat the 3:1 ratio as a guide rather than a rule.

text: The answer should mention factors that were considered before the pay was set

answer: The Executive Director is eligible for an annual salary of £84,957.33. There are no additional bonuses or performance-related additional payments. The salary excludes pension contributions by MSF, which total 10 percent of the gross salary. The salary is 3.4 times the lowest current MSF UK salary of £25,325.72.

answer: The highest salary in MSF UK is paid to our executive director, Vickie Hawkins. Vickie is eligible for an annual salary of £84,957.33 (as of April 2019). There are no additional bonuses or performance-related additional payments. This amount excludes pension contributions by MSF, which total 10 percent of the gross salary. In setting the Executive Director’s new salary, the Board sought to set the salary at a level that was broadly competitive yet still modest. The highest and lowest salaries are at a 3.1 ratio which is strictly adhered to.

text: "The highest and lowest salaries are at a 3.1 ratio which is strictly adhered to." - this is incorrect. The board decided in the future to treat the 3:1 ratio as a guide rather than a rule in order to avoid a possible tension between either underpaying the Executive Director compared to equivalent roles or being forced to pay more for junior roles than is appropriate.


text:
I had just finished smoking my Black and Mild with Brandon and Ryan when it happened. Cary didn’t want to smoke one. I had drank for a while because I thought I didn’t want to feel like myself, thought I should have fun because it’s the weekend. I had thrown up after 4 mixed drinks and a forty. Then had a couple more mixed drinks because throwing up sort of killed my buzz. I didn’t tell anyone I threw up, just calmly stole some of friends gum without him noticing, went to the bathroom, listened to my favorite Bob Dylan song, and got it over with. Then I cleaned it up, blew my nose, and chewed the gum. That stall was probably cleaner now than it was before.

“You good, Colin?”

“Yeah, I just had to take a massive shit from that burrito.”

The four of us are signed up to go canoeing in the morning, which means I’ll have to wake up at 7:30. Ryan and I are both displeased with the vibe in the room for very different, but equally mistaken and embittered reasons. He’s sitting right in front of me, and I get a text from him asking if we should go get the Black and Milds. We both know the reason we’re getting the little cigars, but I can’t quite shake the feeling that we’re trying to live up to some romantic ideal for ourselves that isn’t accurate. But, either I’m relieved to get out of that room or I’m excited to see myself as a guy who drinks all night, then caps the night with a cigar so we head out. Does a Black and Mild even count as a cigar? Its about 1, so I say sure settling on getting 6 hours of sleep rather than the 8 I originally planned because I earnestly wanted to be well-rested for the canoeing trip.

I enjoyed the Black and Mild. It tasted kind of good and felt a bit of a head buzz so I was happy that I could place a positive, tangible reason that I actually felt onto the experience. I had been texting Lily throughout the night – keeping the option open of potentially fucking her, even though I really did want to get some sleep. Luckily, she was just as apathetic about our arrangement that would be better described as a convenience than a relationship. Lily texted me asking if was awake, which is abnormal; usually I have to contact her, even though she seems to want to have sex every time I ask. I go back up to Ryan’s room one last time to get my backpack with the empty bottles of cranberry juice, orange juice, a Naked smoothie, and the quarter-full handle of Taaka – the cheapest vodka around.

As I pass through the lobby of Branscomb, Ryan’s dorm, to leave to go to Lily’s room, is when it happened, specifically. I got a double dose of that panicky buzz that I always sadistically look forward to – seeing a girl I once hooked up with who decided that it probably isn’t in her best interest to do that anymore or ever again. I say double dose because on this special night, I saw Emma and Olivia together, dressed nicely, presumably coming back from some frat or some bar.

They’re friends? I wonder if Emma told Olivia anything about me. I hope so. I hope Olivia didn’t tell Emma anything about me. I bet they went to Tin Roof. I should have went to Tin Roof. If I was drunk enough at Tin Roof I might have been able to get with one of them. Why is this even bothering me right now? I’m going to fuck another girl, and I hooked up with both of them, and I didn’t even have to go to Tin Roof. Well, I just made out with Olivia, so doesn’t really count. But, regardless, I should feel good about myself. If 16 year old Colin saw me in this situation, and knew that I was still unhappy, he’d hate me. Why do I care so much about what 16 year old Colin would think of me?

I quietly, and slightly nervously – which I bet they perceived as unfriendily – say hi to them. I wish was friendlier. Its 2:00 now so I’ll probably end up only getting 4 or 5 hours sleep. Why do I care so much about these two girls? I quickly reminisce about what went wrong with each of them, and ignore the sense that each time I do that – which un-coincidentally happens each time I pass one of them on campus – the story becomes more distorted, more of an illusion.

I fucked it up with Olivia more recently so I once again run through the thoughts that have come to define that situation in my head. I was lucky enough to stumble onto charmingness when I met her one Thursday night at a bar. It was one of those nights that every drunk is chasing no matter how long ago the last time it happened was. I created a romantic conception of myself that I actually liked, and, imagine that, she liked it too. We went back to campus together from the bar. My conception of myself managed to make out with her a few times, but she told me she had class at 9am the next morning when I tried to take it further. I believed her and figured that I still sealed the deal; next time I saw her I should be able to have sex with her, she’ll be able to see me as funny, charming, and capable. I send a few mediocre texts trying to be friendly over the next couple weeks. We fail to meet up at a bar a few times because we’re both not going out (drinking) the same night. How could I be charming if I was sober the next time we met? Is she just thinking of excuses so she doesn’t have to see me? We finally meet up and I fail to recreate the same excitement, the same passion as the first night. I’m a little more myself – a little less charming. The night ends without passion, without a sense of connection, without us hooking up. A few more texts, a little more passion dies. I sense the dying connection between us (probably before she does) and my frustration is manifest in some drunk texts that hasten the process I was trying to prevent. Now we quietly say hi to each other if we happen to pass on campus. I run through all of this by the time I’m at the door of the lobby of Branscomb.

Then I’m onto the Emma situation. We met at Lonnie’s on one of the few other lucky nights where I managed to be charming while drunk. She is a friend of friend that I went to the bar with. We get to talking; we get to making out – the rest is a little hazy. We meet up at a frat another night. I make a move before I feel my charm wearing off just like a health bar would in a video game. She is luckily unperturbed by this quick move. We get to making out and even to fucking later that night. This lifts my spirits enough to feel like talking to her, feel like being friendly, and I end up thinking we genuinely connected. She’s really busy, seemingly, doesn’t want a relationship right now, but we agree we should hang out again sometime. Would she want a relationship if I had more social clout? It’s not that I even want a relationship, but I don’t want her to decide that we’re not going to have a relationship. I want to be undeniably great to her. I text her a few times about meeting at some bar, or some frat. Doesn’t happen. Text again. No response. I decided to ask our mutual friend if she knew what was going on. I didn’t see any reason why Emma would be avoiding me. Some minor investigative work leads to following conclusion.

“Oh, Emma has a boyfriend now. She wasn’t really looking for one, but the hot guy from Kappa Sig asked her to go to the symphony with him, and they’ve been on a few dates now.”

The hot guy from Kappa Sig? The symphony? I tend to focus more on the conclusion rather than the rising action of this story. I kept this all to myself for as long as could. A few months later, I drunkenly told my buddy Mike from back home laughed and called him a faggot. I agreed. He also tells me I shouldn’t stress about her because the kind of girl that would have sex the second time you meet her isn’t really worth getting upset about. I didn’t agree, but I kept that to myself.

I’m halfway to Lily’s dorm now, thinking about how I’ve never seen Emma and Olivia together. They’re in different sororities; I had no idea they were friends. How could I do better? How can I make sure this shit doesn’t keep happening to me? Or do I actually want this to keep happening to me to appeal to some over-romanticized view of myself as a self-destructive hedonist who can’t catch a break with women? I don’t know. It’s all too confusing. I get to Lily’s room and we have sex so I don’t think about it for a while. I end up getting just 3 hours of sleep before the canoeing trip, but it didn’t end up being a problem because I slept on the way there and got some caffeine.

The next day I call my girl back home, Morgan, because I’m feeling down on myself. She actually seems to like listening to me whine for some odd reason. I always figure that if I don’t want to hear it from myself, why would anyone else? I’m just figuring out that’s not always true, but I’m always secretively suspicious that they don’t actually, that they’re listening for some other reason. I never meant to tell Morgan any of this, but she kind of likes it when I talk about other girls. I think it’s weird, but she says it’d be worse if nobody other than her was attracted to me. I feel simultaneously lucky and completely un-special.

She asks about Lily, and I get into how angry I am with myself for reminiscing how I fucked up with two other girls as I am on my way to see one that I actually enjoy being with. Why can’t I let myself enjoy it? Why was I still thinking about what I don’t have? I sense the path that leads to the answers of these questions when I’m on the phone with her. She brings me to these conclusions somehow, even though she never explicitly suggests them. The paths to them just become illuminated. I say to her that I wish I could have went up to them and hugged Olivia and Emma, asked them how their night went, genuinely care about their well-being. I tell her that they put me on a tight rope between arrogance and insecurity. When I think about Olivia, I fall of to the left, thinking that I don’t have anything to offer. I can only keep up the illusion that I’m a commodity for so long. When I think about Emma start to lean right, thinking Duke girls aren’t worth my time. They don’t appreciate me enough. I start to sway to left and think that my best wasn’t even good enough for her, but the wind blasts me to the ground off the right side, and I finally conclude that Mike was right, and she wasn’t even worth it because of her lack of appreciation for me.

This makes me realize what an egomaniac I am, and I get a sense of existential dread that all my work has failed and somehow led to me being this hypocritical, insecure asshole. I don’t even think we have that great a connection with either of them, but I hate that they made that decision. What do I really want? I want them to love me. I want them to be incapable of keeping their mind off me. It doesn’t seem like this is the case. What, they make me feel un-special? Well, they could either be right or wrong. On worse days, I tend to think they’re right. On happier but equally ignorant days, they’re wrong. On the very rare, but absolute best of days, they’re right, but I don’t care. That’s what I want to be working towards, but I don’t feel like I’m moving in the wrong direction.

Oh shit, there’s no way Morgan still finds any of this interesting. Better change the subject, fast.

title: [RF] Panicky Buzz

question: Who is Morgan?

text: Morgan is a friend from home, not a class.

answer: Morgan is a friend from the narrator's hometown. He calls her to talk about his relationship problems.

text: It is omitted that Morgan is the narrator's girlfriend.

text: It is omitted that she listens to the narrator whine.

text: It's omitted that the narrator has a romantic interest in Morgan.

text: It is not stated that he calls her to talk about his relationship problems.

text: The answer should clarify that Morgan is Colin's girlfriend.

text: He's not in any relationship.

answer: Morgan is a friend from the narrator's hometown. He calls her to talk about his relationship problems.

text: Morgan is the narrator's 'girl from back home', she is not just 'a friend'.

text: The response should clarify how the narrator feels towards Morgan.

answer: Morgan is the narrator's girlfriend back home.

text: It is not stated that she is his girlfriend.

text: It's not clear if Morgan is the narrator's girlfriend.

text: The answer should mention that Morgan is the one who helps Colin realize he's an egomaniac.

text: It is omitted that the narrator calls Morgan after the canoeing trip.

text: I would also add that the answer is implied as it is not explicitly stated.

answer: Morgan is a friend from one of the narrator's classes. He calls her to talk about his relationship problems.

text: The story doesn't say that Morgan is in the narrator's class

answer: Morgan is a friend from one of the narrator's classes. He calls her to talk about his relationship problems.

text: It is not stated that Morgan is a friend from one of the narrator's classes.

text: The answer is made up.

text: Morgan is not a friend of the narrator's from class. The narrator does not call her to talk about his relationship problems.

text: There is no evidence that Morgan is a friend from one of the narrator's classes.

text: It is never stated that Morgan is a friend from class.

answer: Morgan is the narrator's girlfriend back home.