mopgoblin on 14/11/2007 at 02:28
Quote Posted by 37637598
Honestly, what is TTLG's take on the matter?
I read through the report linked in the article, and it looks like the methods and analysis are reasonably sound (however, I've never been to Boston and I don't drink coffee, so I can't be certain that an important variable hasn't been overlooked). I'm not sure I understand a few of the entries in tables 3 and 4, and without access to the collected data I can't check the calculations or attempt my own analysis (one possible issue I can see is the focus on the mean rather than quantile-based analysis). Despite this, I'd say that from a scientific perspective there would be a solid basis for further study into the precise cause of the measured difference. It'd also be interesting to find out why the graphs for female wait time in Figure 1 appear to be bimodal.
There's still the question of whether further study is actually deserving of the required effort and resources in this case - I expect most people, at any time other than when waiting for coffee, would agree that waiting an extra twenty seconds for coffee is pretty unimportant. Of course, if the effect persists and scales up with general and more significant economic interactions then it could be genuinely worthy of attention.
Volca on 14/11/2007 at 07:37
What about this:
They're really trying their best to make a good coffee for the "usually discriminated" people, but the better quality, the more time spent.
I know it's a silly idea (:erm:), but it kind of reverses the whole meaning.
Lhet on 14/11/2007 at 08:06
I'm shocked that somebody funded this research.
mopgoblin on 14/11/2007 at 08:35
Why? It doesn't look like the research done so far would have any significant expenses attached - I'd be very surprised if the resources it consumed would have had a meaningful effect on another project.
rachel on 14/11/2007 at 09:41
Quote Posted by heretic1dg
everytime I've tasted McCoffee I would swear I was drinking hot water with brown food coloring.
I had that feeling with 99% of the coffee I drank in the US. When I asked for an expresso most of the time the reaction was like, "uh?"
Starbucks isn't the whipped crème de la whipped crème, but at least they can fix you a "real" coffee on request. As in rich, strong, tachycardia-inducing coffee.
Fingernail on 14/11/2007 at 10:08
Yeah, in truth at least you can rely on the big coffee chains, much as they are overpriced, it's usually better to spend a little more on some real coffee instead of relying on other outlets using Nescafé machines or providing tiny polystyrene cups, so it's a balance between spending about twice as much but actually getting a decent amount of some passable coffee.
D'Juhn Keep on 14/11/2007 at 18:33
Quote Posted by raph
When I asked for an expresso most of the time the reaction was like, "uh?"
Maybe because it's an espresso!
Xanther on 16/11/2007 at 07:19
LOL.. I love their data determination.
They treated all drinks as fancy or not fancy. Fancy being anything that wasnt a basic coffee or tea that needed little preperation.
Quote:
“Fancy orders” include any item requiring preparation while non-fancy orders include a plain coffee or hot tea, which could be dispensed immediately.
Anyone thats made coffees know that a cuppachino or latte are so much easier to make than a skinny moca soy with low foam cuppachino.
Of course they are going to have women's orders longer since for the most part males generaly go for the more basic 'fancy drinks'.
Scots Taffer on 16/11/2007 at 07:43
speaking as a mother man, if you order anything fancier than latte+flavour then you're obviously gay and may as well ask the homofag server for a blowjob
charlestheoaf on 16/11/2007 at 08:46
I like steamed soymilk with toffee nut.
