Re: NM non-process
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 10:22:01PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 05:34:06PM -0600, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 04:09:15PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > > I disagree; if the applicant knows why they are being delayed, then
> > > the fact that this information is not published on the website does
> > > not indicate that the process is broken.
> >
> > That's a pretty big *if*, and as I've indicated above the applicants
> > don't seem to be informed or contacted.
>
> This condition was directed at people who seem to be complaining about the
> process without being involved in it, nor in communication with those who
> are. These days, there are more complaints about NM from the peanut gallery
> than from the applicants themselves.
Perhaps that's because the applicants have found that their attempts to
voice their complaints are ignored. Just because someone is in the
"peanut gallery" doesn't mean they can't see a problem with the current
state of things WRT the NM queue.
A recent run (moments ago) of my nm-status script shows that there are a
number of new comments that have been added to some of the applicants
that are awaiting DAM approval. This looks rather promising.
--
Jamin W. Collins
This is the typical unix way of doing things: you string together lots
of very specific tools to accomplish larger tasks. -- Vineet Kumar
Reply to: