Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2010 December 8

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

December 8

Buildings

I am looking for an interesting old building, from anywhere in the world, any time up to around early 20th century, a building which has been designed to have a decent amount of natural light even in the deepest parts, to have a continual flow of fresh air throughout and to stay at a comfortable temperature all year round, in spite of cold winds, bright sunshine and so on. Such, though, that all of this can be achieved with as little machinary and energy as possible, and with all the required systems being intrinsic to the design of the building. Does anyone here know of anything particularly remarkable like this that they would be willing to share?

148.197.121.205 (talk) 10:33, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

How about the Casa Milà (1905-1910) in Barcelona? Naturally ventilated through that big central atrium. Blakk and ekka 12:00, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

There are many buildings in the middles east that provide a comfortable living space whist subjected to extreme changes of ambient temperature. There is seldom found a dark corner either. They incorporate windcatchers and thick stone or adobe walls is a must. However, if you have grown up with air-conditioning, then you might find they don't even-out the extremes nearly as much as you want and gritty dust soon covers everything -unless you have a large harem of domestic staff to constantly clean.--Aspro (talk) 12:41, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

As with a similar recent question, try Sir John Soane's Museum. In the north "to have a continual flow of fresh air throughout and to stay at a comfortable temperature all year round" are mutually contradictory as the outside air temperature is very often unpleasantly cold. I don't know of any pre-20th. century buildings that were solar heated in northern latitudes, they are a very recent innovation. Living in a crowded urban situation, I wish the top lighting and nine-feet high garden walls would become standard, to obtain privacy and remove eyesores and traffic noise. Old-fashioned shopping arcades may fulfill your criteria: http://www.google.co.uk/images?um=1&hl=en&q=shopping+arcade&ie=UTF-8&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&biw=1024&bih=609 92.29.123.221 (talk) 14:05, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I've heard that the Pantheon is rather remarkable in that it is well lit by the single oculus in the roof. I don't know about temperature, though. Hemoroid Agastordoff (talk) 19:56, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

It is refreshingly cool during the summmer, but if the winter is cold it is not the place to get warm in, with that big hole in the roof and no insulation to speak of. --Saddhiyama (talk) 21:43, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

How about a mediaeval cathedral, such as Durham Cathedral or York Cathedral? Its thermal mass should remove temperature fluctuations, and the large stained-glass windows provide solar gain. The extremely high ceilings make it airy. For greater temperature stability something sunk into the earth to receive both earth-heat and insulation, and with top-lighting like an arcade, may be what you want. Edit: I imagine that the best design for your purposes would be something like the doughnut-cylinder central atrium of Casa Mila, but sunk into the earth and with a glass roof over it. That way you get light into the building and insulation or earth-heat from the surrounding earth. 92.29.113.166 (talk) 00:20, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

A lot of medieval cathedrals are fairly gloomy inside on all but the brightest summer day. There might be exceptions. Googlemeister (talk) 15:21, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

I do not think they are dark but its just an impression given by the dark walls and dark furishings compared to the modern white or light ones we are accustomed to. If you replaced the stained glass with clear glass they would be much brighter, as I've seen in one or two old churches that have clear glass. In southern latitudes they may be designed to be gloomy to keep the sun out and keep them cool. 92.15.30.71 (talk) 16:38, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

19th. century British prisons were designed with the OPs criteria in mind. There are several surviving examples. 92.24.189.207 (talk) 11:34, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Why did O'Reilly buy out CSK? 67.188.104.24 (talk) 10:58, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I know it's been bought out, I just want to know WHY...?
Today I heard on "Monster Jam" that the owner and founder
of CSK died, is that why? Or did O'Reilly just want a corporate takeover? Or what?

According to this, O'Reilly bought them in 2008 and CSK's founder died in 2010, so it's not because of that. I'd go with your "O'Reilly just wanted to take them over" theory. Recury (talk) 19:48, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I have an I6 Auto '89 BMW 525i my gf bought and need help on 2 issues.

1. When we bought it, the brake lights didn't work, then the Seller took it for a day and "Fixed" the problem, but now the brakes lights stay on, what is the problem?67.188.104.24 (talk) 11:07, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

2. does a car bought by private owner have to have a smog to be put in my name in Alameda County California? not saying to register to drive, just to have in my name? I have the original Pink slip with the signature of the previous owner, but haven't gone to the DMV to put in my name cause I also don't know if it costs anything.

To answer #1, what happened is there is a switch which is attached to the brake pedal that turns the lights on when you push it down. There are two possibilities. The first is that the switch is "sticky" and tends to get jammed in either the "on" or "off" position; when the problem was "fixed", the seller jimmied the switch so it worked for a little while; now it has stuck again only this time it is stuck in the "on" rather than "off" position. The other possibility is that to "fix" the problem, the seller may have just bypassed the broken switch, wireing the brake lights either directly to the battery or wiring them to the taillight switch, so that it doesn't work with the brakes anymore. To answer #2: While it may cost money to get the paperwork in order, it certainly doesn't cost any money to ask the DMV if it costs money. In other words, the best solution is to call the California DMV and ask for clarification. As an aside, a very important lesson to learn from this is that whenever you purchase a car, you should always ask the seller if you may take it to your own mechanic to get it checked out before you buy it. It's not always in the seller's best interest to reveal all of the car's problems or to fix them for you, so a neutral mechanic is the best option. If the mechanic finds anything wrong with the car, or if the seller balks at the idea, just don't buy the car. --Jayron32 15:32, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

2) You will likely need to pay state sales tax when you transfer the title, which could be quite a bit, typically based on the purchase price or fair market value, whichever is highest. But it may well be illegal to drive it otherwise, and renewing the registration will be impossible, and it might also be difficult to get insurance. I don't know if an emissions (smog) test is required in your location, so I won't comment on that. StuRat (talk) 17:01, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Too late, my GF just HAD to have the car, this was about a year ago. My phone is dead, can't call out, that is why I asked... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.188.104.24 (talk) 21:11, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Honestly, the brake light switch is usually an easy fix. If you don't want to do it yourself, a garage will do it for not much money. It shouldn't put you out more than a hundred dollars or so. I had a situation where mine did the exact same thing (the brake lights wouldn't turn off). I mickey-moused the switch until I could get it to the mechanic, and IIRC, the cost of the labor to put the switch in was more expensive than the switch, and the whole job probably didn't cost me more than a c-note. That being said, my car is a Ford, and a Bimmer may be more expensive to fix. But probably not too much more. --Jayron32 21:20, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

PAYBOX

is paybox real.Please explain to me —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.221.209.6 (talk) 14:10, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

It is real. But is it OK? Remember one of the golden anti-scam rules "If it seems too good to be true it probably is!" There many other perfectly good companies to choose from. Having said that there is some comment here [1]. Richard Avery (talk) 14:30, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Here's a post from someone with some evidence that it is a scam: [2]. StuRat (talk) 15:10, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Paypal's Politics

Has anyone got any novel ideas about expressing disapproval about the way Paypal has entered the political scene by blocking payments into Wikileaks(no connection with Wikipedia and associates) Caesar's Daddy (talk) 14:21, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

In all truth they probably had little choice in the matter; they probably received a polite visit from someone at the FBI who explained that if they continued to serve as a courier for Wikileaks' funding, they'd get their assets frozen under some anti-terrorism law or something like that, or at least be held partially liable for whatever Wikileaks did with the money. --Mr.98 (talk) 14:48, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

In this article on the Huffington Post, a PayPal VP indicated that it was indeed because of some sort of indirect pressure from the US State Department. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:55, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

:See Operation Payback#Operation Avenge Assange which is expressing disapproval in Denial-of-service attacks. Paypal is ownwed by eBay, and eBay has 15 000 employees who can't all be happy about yet more Criticism of eBay. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 14:54, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

You might want to consider however whether such methods may be counter productive in what they make people think of those supporting wikileaks (and perhaps wikileaks itself) even though it's unclear if even a resonable minority of wikileak supporters, support such actions and wikileaks themselves haven't AFAIK encouraged such action. Nil Einne (talk) 16:27, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

In the absence of any good ideas, there is always the option to switch to other providers. List of on-line payment service providers. Are there any missing from this list -does anybody know?--Aspro (talk) 14:56, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't use, and don't even know, almost none of the alternative providers (excluding Moneybookers). If I want to donate money to something, Paypal, Visa and Mastercard are still the most common choices. Equally they still need to receive the money on the other end. For that, they still need a Visa, Mastercard or at least bank account. Mr.K. (talk) 12:45, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Piercing guns

People say that they are dangerous, is there any proof that they are, or is it all histeria?--Accdude92 (talk to me!) 16:59, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Is this it: piercing gun? Bus stop (talk) 17:01, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

YesAccdude92 (talk) 17:06, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

OK. Just wanted to confirm. Bus stop (talk) 17:07, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

And a little comment on proof versus common sense: In a case like this, where piercing the skin is done with a non-sterile object, we really don't need to wait for a double-blind study to be done with 1100 subjects in order to determine that there's a risk of infection, it's obvious. StuRat (talk) 17:12, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Ok that part I understand, but what about the theory that it causes more trauma? Is that proven?Accdude92 (talk) 17:13, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I've used both,and there seems to be no difference.However,the gun is touted as being easy for anyone to use and the skill of the operator may come into it.Also studs do not allow for easy cleaning the way a sleeper or ring does so infection could be a problem caused by poor aftercare not initial trauma.Hotclaws (talk) 00:47, 9 December 2010 (UTC).

Prices at competing gas stations

A lot of intersections and highway rest stops have multiple gas stations. How are some stations able to charge 20 to 30 cents more for each gallon of gas than a station 100 to 200 feet away? I realize many people have gas credit cards and there is strong brand loyalty, but are there other factors involved? Hemoroid Agastordoff (talk) 17:35, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

It has never made much sense to me either. One possibility, for which I have absolutely no proof, is that the gasoline distributors may be directly setting the price for an entire region (or the price before local taxes and fees, anyway). If that were the case, the individual station operator may have little or no flexibility to respond to price fluctuations in their immediate surroundings. How likely this is probably varies by station and brand. Some brands actually own many of their filling stations directly, and would be in a position to enforce broad regional pricing policies if they wanted to. Other stations are managed via franchising and would be expected to have more local control. And yet other stations are completely independent operators who don't have a commitment with any specific supplier, and could presumably set any price they wanted. Anyway, I should emphasize that this is merely my speculation. I don't really know why should price discrepancies occur. Dragons flight (talk) 17:50, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

A major reason is how convenient it is for the driver to get to the gas station. If the driver has a choice between simply taking a right (in the US) into gas station A versus having to make a U-turn onto a narrow street before being able to enter gas station B, then the drivers can be treated by segments: (1) Those who don't look at the competing prices, and will automatically choose gas station A because it's convenient to get to; (2) those who will choose the inconvenience of the U-turn if gas station B is even 1 cent cheaper; (3) those who will only take the U-turn if gas station B is 10 cents cheaper; etc. Why We Buy is a book I recommend that discusses this type of phenomenon. The importance of convenient access is also why there can be a trillion Starbucks stores all within a block of each other. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:52, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I live in the UK and get e-mail alerts frpm PetrolPrices to let me know how much each petrol station is charging. 92.30.231.73 (talk) 19:21, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Not directly related, but one thing that this reminded me of is the economics of gas stations in general. I have heard on several different radio stories and programs that gasoline is essentially a loss leader. The gas station only really makes enough money to stay open and operate by selling you water at $1.79 per 20 ounce bottle. Over the past 50 years or so, the price of gasoline has not kept up with the costs of operating the store; especially because the companies that sell the gasoline to the gas stations take a greater proportion of the sale cost, to the point where the gas station makes essentially nothing on gasoline. It is actually worse in "name brand" stores, where the gas station owner has to pay franchise fees for the right place BP or Exxon on his store sign; especially when the generic "Bob's Gas and Guzzle" down the street gets his gasoline from the same supplier. The gas station often pays the extra fees because the name recognition gets more foot traffic in his store, as do customer loyalty credit cards and stuff like that. More customers means more outrageously priced water (and other products) is sold, and as noted, that's the only way the stores make money. --Jayron32 19:22, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

My understanding is that gas stations are actually a varied set of businesses. Some use gas as a loss leader to attract customers to their profitable convenience store and sell gas slightly below cost. These prices may be especially low when a competitor is very close by. Others set the price so that they make a small margin on gasoline and hope to make money from their convenience store or their auto repair and maintenance services. Those looking for convenience-store traffic cannot set their price much above those of nearby competitors. A third category of gas stations set gas prices that allow them to make a small profit on each sale of gasoline and/or to actively discourage customers who just want gas. This third category is almost invariably primarily a mechanic (car-repair and -maintenance) shop that also offers gas to customers who are there to spend $400 on a repair and don't care that a fill-up will cost them $40 instead of $35. Another variant is a gas station in an area where affluent people live or work. These gas stations charge higher prices, but they have attendants who pump the gas (so that the driver doesn't have to), and they invariably check the oil, clean the windows, and perhaps check tire pressure. There are people who make enough money that they don't mind paying 30 cents more per gallon to get this kind of service. When you see a big price difference between neighboring gas stations, the one with the higher price has a different business model than the one with the lower price. Marco polo (talk) 20:14, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Of course, you'll note that the vast majority of your models aren't based on selling gasoline as the primary commodity. Either they get you to pay the premium on the more expensive gasoline because you're already stuck their patronizing their primary business (and thus gasoline is a suplemental, and not primary, source of revenue) OR they are selling something like "convenience and service", such as the VERY RARE full service station whereby the little carhop comes out and fills your tank, checks the oil, cleans the windshield, etc. In that case, what you are paying for is the service, again it isn't the gasoline, because if all you wanted was gas, you'd save the thirty cents and go down the road. What you never find anymore is a straight gas station, which just sells you gas. That's because its quite impossible to make enough money at it to make it worth it. Edging the price up a few cents per gallon may offset the loss on gasoline, but this small increase in revenue is unlikely to overcome the operating costs of running the business. If you try to build a gasoline-only station anywhere, you have to set the price so high that the competitors that are also selling another service, such as a convenience store, can easily poach enough business to keep you from making any real profit from your station. --Jayron32 20:45, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't think that there are many gas stations left in the United States whose main source of revenue is gas sales. The main exception might be the gas stations in rest areas along major long-distance superhighways. These rest areas typically have convenience stores more or less separate from the gas station. The gas station is able to make money on gas because there is no competition close by, so prices are higher than at other gas stations in the region, but drivers will pay those prices rather than exit the superhighway and have to navigate unfamiliar roads. The combination of modest margins on gas sales and high volume would make these businesses viable based on gas sales alone. Marco polo (talk) 21:32, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Also, those gas stations are generally run by the Turnpike Authority (or equivalent) themselves. That is, those types of gas stations are built on private toll roads, and are owned by the organization that runs the toll road. That creates a very different set of circumstances. It should also be noted that, in those cases, the convenience store and the restaurant and the garage at the "rest area" are all still owned by the same owner (the Turnpike Authority) so they still aren't being run as a stand-alone gas station. Your point is valid, about them being able to charge higher prices because of the lack of competition, but it isn't true that such ventures are gasoline-only businesses. In fact, in all my driving along the various highways of America, I have only run into a handful of full-service rest areas (gas and/or restaurant) along free highways. There's one on Rte 128 in Massachusetts; but that is managed by the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority (the people that run the Mass Pike), there's like 3 or 4 on I-95 in Connecticut, but that was once the toll road known as the Connecticut Turnpike, so these are sort of "grandfathered" in. There's 3 or so on the Merritt Parkway in Connecticut; these are genuine gas-only ventures which I believe might meet your definition as a gas-only station as part of a rest-area. There's the one on the Hutchinson River Parkway in New York, but that has a convenience store too. That's about it. I think that's because the Interstate Highway Act and related legislation does not allow such "dedicated" commercial rest areas to be built on free interstates. The cases where they exists are on roads that predate the Interstate system, and thus have a sort of "grandfather" status; or the roads aren't interstates at all. --Jayron32 21:47, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't think I've ever seen a case where one station charges "20 to 30 cents more for each gallon of gas than a station 100 to 200 feet away", at least not for the same octane and payment type. But, of course, if you're comparing the cash price for 85 octane with the credit card price for 94 octane, that price range would be expected. StuRat (talk) 08:28, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

20 cent difference between nearby stations can occur when it is difficult to get to one of the stations and easy to get to the other. There is a gas station situation near one of my relatives where to get to it you need to cross 3 lanes of traffic, to get to the left turn lane, and then turn across 3 lanes of traffic without a light. They are usually priced 20c lower for the same fuel ocatane as the station across the street since the interstate exit strongly favors the other station. Googlemeister (talk) 15:19, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

These two gas stations differ by about 20¢ per gallon at all three octane levels, with the Arco to the south being cheaper. It's quite difficult to get to the Arco if you're going west on Marin (zoom out to get a better idea of why). -- BenRG (talk) 23:30, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

At the intersection of Ten Mile Road and Orchard Lake Road in the suburbs of Detroit, the Shell station on the east side of Orchard Lake would routinely have gas prices thirty cents or more above those of the no-name brand on the west side of the road. I never did figure out how either of them was staying in business: the no-name station had to be losing money on every gallon of gas sold (the price of a gallon of crude oil plus the gas tax was less than the price they were selling gas at), while the Shell station could not possibly be getting enough business to cover fixed costs. --Carnildo (talk) 02:18, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

In a related anecdote, the BP station near where I work routinely charges $0.10 more than the no-name competitor across the street. But during the gulf disaster they charged about $0.15 LESS than the place across the street. So I guess brand recognition (good and bad) must be a big part of it. APL (talk) 21:28, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

The Holiday

I have had my heart broken today, it is almost christmas, I am off work from 22/12 to 04/01, I have a budget of £700 including flight and accomodation, where can I go I need to get the hell out of the UK. Any sugestions please help me, I was utterly alone last christmas even though I made plans with people, they stood me up, and I cant handle that situation again, not emotionally especially now that she has left me in pieces, I dont want to see any English people. I looked at couchsurfing but how safe is that really? and anyway I dont think I will be fun to have around for christmas as I am not a happy person right now. The cheapest flight I could find was to Oslo, but even the cheapest hostel is still very expensive, for me. Any ideas people I am begging here! I need help with this, before I am alone in my room for a 3rd christmas running. I cant handle that. Please. ~manly 28yo cries like a little girl —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.3.145.145 (talk) 19:46, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

If you don't care where you stay, I've had very good experiences with Hotwire finding deeply discounted rooms at the last minute (booking less than less than 24 before check-in). I don't know if it would work well during the holiday period though. One of my friends also had a good experience couchsurfing, but I don't know how consistently one can expect good results with that. Many travel sites will advertise various "deals". Looking through them might give you ideas of where you can fly cheaply. You didn't say where you are starting from in the UK, which probably affects how easily you can get a cheap flight. You might also consider train travel, as that could be cheaper than flying for some routes. I've even heard of people using overnight trains as a substitute for hotels, but you need to plan that carefully in order to make it work well. Dragons flight (talk) 21:55, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Turn up at the SAS desk at Heathrow and say: I haven't much money but can you fly me some where nice please? When they ask And who might you be ? Just answer: Julian Assange You are guaranteed to get a free flight--Aspro (talk) 20:12, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Really helpful....thanks.

Du är välkommen. Ha en trevlig flygning --Aspro (talk) 21:34, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

By the way, "du är välkommen" is horribly literal translation of the idiom "you're welcome". I think "varsågod" is what you meant to say... Gabbe (talk) 07:51, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

"Ha en trevlig flygning" is quite awkward as well. "Trevlig resa" would be more apt. --Soman (talk) 22:09, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Oh I'm feel disappointed. My linguistic mentor (who is a Swedish chef) positivity waxed lyrically on my min flyt i det svenska språket.--Aspro (talk) 22:57, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

You can get from Watford to Cardiff for £70 return on the train. There are English people in Cardiff, it's true, but there are also Welsh people. Marnanel (talk) 21:42, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

It can't cost that much to get to Normandy from England can it? I mean I have heard of people who swam there. Googlemeister (talk) 21:57, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

It's 110 miles; quite a paddle! Alansplodge (talk) 16:47, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Those who swim from England to France don't usually go to Normandy, but to the Pas de Calais. If the OP wants France on a budget, all the cheap Eurostar deals are probably gone, but you can go on a ferry and then get a train. Where to, though, that will be nice in this weather? Paris, but wrap up very warm. Lille is easy to get to and has its charms. One or more of Brussels, Bruges, Antwerp? Itsmejudith (talk) 23:12, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Much cheaper option: volunteer over Christmas. Charities are always short of people to run Christmas events on the big days; you'd have an iron-clad alibi (who can really criticise you?); you'd get to be around people who speak English, but know absolutely nothing about you and your life except that you're a decent enough person to be there; you'd probably meet a few interesting 'characters' who can be spun into man-of-the-world stories in later conversation; you'd get to feel Christmassy, without the social stress; you'd still have your nestegg to spend on an interesting experience when you feel less crap. Don't waste this trip when you feel so bad: do something to force yourself out of your own thoughts and preoccupations. 86.161.208.185 (talk) 23:31, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I understand the impulse. When I was in my 20s I often found travel therapeutic. The key is to really embrace the travel, to experience the place you are visiting, and to banish from your mind whatever it is that was troubling you. Unfortunately, though, £700 isn't a lot for a 2-week trip. If you minimize your travel cost, you will end up in a neighboring country where the weather is just as dreary as in England this time of year and where everyone around you will be celebrating Christmas, or Noël, or Kertsmis, or whatever. On such a tight budget, this won't be easy, but my advice would be to leave Christendom altogether and go to a country where they don't do Christmas. The cheapest such destination seems to be Istanbul. Per Opodo, you can fly there from London for £335 return. This is almost half your budget, but it rescues you from Christmas. In order to have money for food, you are going to have to stay in a dorm. Wikitravel has some options. You are not going to have a lot of money left for drinking and merriment, but maybe it would be better for you to bring a few books to read, a thick notebook to write in a journal, and to spend your days wandering around one of Europe's most ancient and fascinating cities. Marco polo (talk) 01:40, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

By the way, I just found out that winter weather in Istanbul is not very different from in England. However, it is quite a bit further south, so it will be brighter, a bit less chilly, and less gloomy. But it tends to be cool and rainy, with an occasional light snow. Per the BBC, in a 2-week period at this time of year, you are likely to have about 9 rainy days. Sunlight (i.e. blue sky) averages 3 hours a day. By contrast in London, you would have 7 rainy days but only 1 hour per day of sunlight on average. I still think it would be a good getaway. Marco polo (talk) 01:56, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Seven hundred pounds are a lot of money. Book in advance with an airline like Wizzair. For my part, I think Poland would be very welcoming - Christmas time is quite unique here, and I guarantee that if you book a hostel room in a city like Kraków or Wrocław for this period you're bound to run into some other vagabonds who wanted to get away from things. And trust me, you'll definitely enjoy it. Cheers, Ouro (blah blah) 08:38, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree that Kraków and Wrocław are wonderful places. When I visited them several years ago, I found people there very friendly. This would not be a bad choice if you don't mind a different type of Christmas and possibly some quite cold and wintry weather. Marco polo (talk) 15:08, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Wrap-up well! Today's daytime max is -4C. Alansplodge (talk) 16:52, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

If you really want to escape from the UK and Christmas, try flying to an Arab country. There are cheap flights from the UK to Málaga, Spain. From Málaga you can take a ship to Melilla in the African continent. The whole trip should cost you not more than £200 return. The remaining £500 should be enough to spend some amenable days in Morocco. Trustinchaos (talk) 16:20, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

I thought you could get holidays in Spain dirt cheap at this time of year? Should be warmer and sunnier, at least on the soujtern coast, and lots of British pensioners to chat to. Does not Ryanair do flights to places for £5 any more? I bet £700 is enough for a last-minute all-in package holiday somewhere warmer. Maybe there's someting on lastminute dot com or your high Street travel agents. 92.15.30.71 (talk) 17:50, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

If you include all the taxes in the Ryanair price, the ticket costs more than these £5. Trustinchaos (talk) 03:32, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for all the help people, I have found a ticket to Oslo for under £200, so I am going to shave off my long hair, shave off my beard, buy a really good suit, and a diamond ring and I am going to ask her to marry me, if she says no I will buy the ticket to Oslo and never come back. Wish me luck, I am pretty sure she is going to say no. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.3.145.145 (talk) 21:08, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Wow, I had assumed you were a woman. 92.24.190.135 (talk) 22:40, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

If you change religions spending Christmas alone won't be so much of a big deal. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:56, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

As an ex-christian atheist (and noting that atheism isn't a religion - so this isn't an exact matching anecdote) I'll politely disagree that changing religion can significantly reduce the impact of one's society's most popular holidays. --203.202.43.54 (talk) 02:21, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Try http://flightchecker.moneysavingexpert.com and the link to Cheap Flightbroker on that page for bargains. 92.28.245.105 (talk) 17:01, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

omline job

What are some of the genuine online jobs —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.221.209.6 (talk) 21:07, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Depending on how you count job, there is Amazon Mechanical Turk. If you really bust your ass, you might make enough money at that to live on. There are also teachers who teach online courses, and many officeplaces allow telecommuting, whereby you work from a home office, and your primary means of communication with coworkers and clients is online. --Jayron32 21:16, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Regulation of Irish charities?

In the UK the Charities Commission regulates charities, and requires regular public reports which are publicly available. Is there an equivalent place where I can get information about charities registered in the ROI? I am looking for financial filings that I cannot find on the charities own website. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.189.106.4 (talk) 21:21, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

It looks from this that Ireland is only just getting its act together and setting up a Charities Regulatory Authority. See also this which suggests that they started the work os establishing the Authority in February 2009. (They may not have got very far). At the foot of the first linked page is an address for what enquiries can be made about charities, but it does not cover your need; the Charities Section, Office of the Revenue Commissioners will tell you if an organisation is or is not a charity for tax relief purposes. And that's your lot. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:33, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

That's what I feared, thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.189.106.4 (talk) 21:38, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

How to prevent porridge from exploding in a microwave?

When preparing sachets of porridge, with skimmed milk, in a microwave oven, I am experiencing a problem. Sometimes, it explodes all over the microwave.

I've tried putting a plate over the bowl, but it just blows the plate off. I've stirred in half-way through.

For info, it's the brand "Oats so simple".

Suggestions please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.192.157.204 (talk) 22:22, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Ask at the horse's mouth manufacturer:Oatso Simple. Email them:quaker.consumer@quaker.co.uk--Aspro (talk) 22:34, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Try splitting the cooking time in three, so you stir at ⅓ and ⅔ of the way through. FWIW, making porridge in a saucepan doesn't take significantly longer than using the microwave. DuncanHill (talk) 22:38, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Apart from using a saucepan (my usual solution, and as easy and quick as the microwave: quicker if you include the 'cleaning the microwave' time), you could try something like Ready Brek where you can just heat up the milk, then add it to the finely-ground oats. Just as tasty. 86.161.208.185 (talk) 22:46, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Great suggestions, thanks, will try those.

If anyone has any other solutions, I will check back. Thanks again, 94.192.157.204 (talk) 22:56, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Last thing at night, put pot of rolled oats at back of hearth and bank up ciders and ash around it. Come the morning you will have lovely smooth oat porridge. This will work with very cheap plain rolled oats, which haven't been pre-steamed by Mr Quaker and re-sold with a hefty mark up. Season with salt. Also, don't and never, use a saucepan. If you must, use a bain-marie. Oh. I'm feeling hungry again. Bon Appétit!--Aspro (talk) 22:57, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

All oats you buy have been pre-steamed - its practically impossible to buy them uncooked. I've tried. 92.29.113.166 (talk) 23:02, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

You're not trying hard enough.Feeding Oats. Also, if you add a little linseed oil before putting your head in the nosebag, you will get a lovely shiny coat.--Aspro (talk) 23:31, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Its illegal to sell for human consumption and unhealthy to eat animal feed. 92.29.113.166 (talk) 23:53, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree about using a saucepan - in fact I'm sure you'd get a better result buying a large bag of oats rather than a sachet - but otherwise you could try muesli. Avoid muesli that contains sugar or whey, its sickly. 92.29.113.166 (talk) 23:02, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Muesli! What was it, that Harry Lime said in the Third Man? You know what the fellow said – in Italy, for thirty years under the Borgias, they had warfare, terror, murder and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and the Renaissance. In Switzerland, they had brotherly love, they had five hundred years of democracy and peace – and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock and Muesli!--Aspro (talk) 23:40, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Harry Lime was a drug dealer - I recall he dealt in fake drugs that killed people - and he was a fictional character. So what does he know? I don't remember Orson Welles saying the "and muesli" bit either - I think you've made that up. 92.29.113.166 (talk) 23:50, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Oh! Maybe that last bit that ended up on the cutting room floor ;-)--Aspro (talk) 01:09, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Fair comments, gratefully received. However; Anything a bit more scientific, or related to the specifics, Sorry if the q. was unclear; Given only a Popty ping, and wishing to cook cheapo lazy packet shite - any ideas on reducing the cleaning bills? Thanks in antic... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.192.157.204 (talk) 01:50, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Microwave on full power until the porridge is near boiling - for my bowl and my microwave that takes about 2 minutes - then microwave on minimum power until ready to eat - about 3 more minutes to get it just the way I like it. I add butter and maple syrup before eating. Oat-so-simple isn't bad but I prefer porridge oats and even the luxury brands will give you a lot more porridge for about the same money. filceolaire (talk) 01:53, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

thanks!

I thought Ready Brek only required pouring boiling water on it? Then you could have instand soup and instant noodles for lunch. Or hopefully not. 92.15.30.71 (talk) 16:46, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Only if, like the True Scotsman, you like your porridge made with water rather than milk. Ready Brek, in its basic, original form, is just very finely milled oats. You could make it up with boiling water, hot milk, hot cream, hot yoghurt, hot chocolate, hot coconut milk, hot apple juice, almost any hot liquid with enough water in. I think it's nice made with hot milk heated in a mug in the microwave, with a spoonful of honey stirred through, but you could be more Scottish :) 86.161.208.185 (talk) 21:58, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Kick Wrestling

I know there is a martial known as Kick-Boxing, but is there also something called Kick-Wrestling, i just want to know because the other day a friend of mine who is asian and a kung fu practitioner and i were sparring a little he punched my leg and said that i had a hard as steel legs and almost broke his wrist and the other i was also sparring with my mexican friend who used to be a security guard and knew wrestling or lucha libre and i defeated him. so i want to know is there something known as kick-wrestling or something similar. you know something that uses my legs to wrestle someone else.thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.79.129.82 (talk) 23:02, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

There are lots of systems of martial arts, literally hundreds of them. Kickboxing is actually a bunch of different martial arts, from Japanese kickboxing to Muay Thai, a martial art from Thailand. There are probably some martial arts which involve some combination of wrestling and kicking. Indeed, Jeet Kune Do, a hybrid martial art developed in the 1960s combines elements of wrestling with punching and kicking; it has been called by some to be the ancestor of modern MMA. I am not aware of any specific martial art commonly known as "Kick-wrestling" directly, but there may be some. The article List of martial arts is a fairly comprehensive list of worldwide martial arts. You may find what you are looking for there. --Jayron32 02:31, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

In grossly general terms, martial arts can be split into two groups: those that involve grappling (wrestling and submissions) and those that involve striking (punching and kicking). Once you combine elements of those two, you're essentially talking about a "mixed" martial art, almost by definition. Matt Deres (talk) 14:32, 9 December 2010 (UTC)