Re: Reaping non-advocated applicants
On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 01:52:37AM -1000, Brian Russo wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 07:47:21AM -0500, Gopal Narayanan wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 09:52:32PM +0100, Ralf Treinen wrote:
> > >
> > > Sounds like a good idea to me. But what to do with them? I think that
> > > applicants that have not found an advocate after, say, 4 weeks should
> > > be removed.
> > I think that is a bit harsh. My suggestion is to leave them in the
> > queue, and not process them (i.e. hand them over to an AM) until they
> > find an advocate. A weekly/monthly auto-remider might be sent to the
> > applicant reminding them of this situation. Sometimes, it might take
> > an applicant more than 4 weeks to get advocated, and by booting them
> > out, we might potentially turn off a good applicant.
> is it really that hard for a "good applicant" to get
> advocated within a 4 week period?
> besides, they can always re-apply
> once they get advocated.
But then they have to get back to the back of the queue. I was
envisioning a queue handling process by which the from the pool of
applicants, the first advocated applicant is handed over to the next
AM. This way the applicants retain their place in the queue and once
they get advocated, can be processed quicker.
Gopal Narayanan <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Debian GNU/Linux Developer
Dept. of Astronomy, University of Massachusetts, Amherst