On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 01:58:26PM +1100, Craig Small wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 08:36:03PM -0600, Donald J Bindner wrote:
> > It was pointed out that by definition, you won't be assigned your
> > AM until you have waited "Maximum Days" since they are presumably
> > handled as a queue (i.e. the person waiting longest gets the next
> > assignment).
> Nope, that's incorrect.
It is incorrect, but the spirit is right, since you don't get
your assignment until you reach the end of the queue. When
applicants see the "average", they expect that it is a measure of
how long they should expect to wait. I know; I was recently in
I'm not suggesting that you change the algorithms necessarily.
You have pointed out that they provide useful information to the
managers. What I am suggesting is that they don't provide useful
information to the applicants (who want a measure of how long
they can expect to wait), and we might make them more aware of
Perhaps an "about these statistics" link that explains how they
might be misleading to a newcomer. In particular, applicants
need to realize that being beyond average is not a useful
indicator of the imminence of receiving an application manager.
Nearing the maximum days mark is really the indicator that you
may receive your AM soon.
I teach statistics, and I had the wrong impression. I should
think someone who doesn't teach math at university has even less
of a chance. There ought to be some way to improve this.
Don Bindner <firstname.lastname@example.org>