On Sun, Aug 29, 2004 at 12:59:26PM -0500, David Moreno Garza wrote: > On Sun, 2004-08-29 at 14:58 +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: > > Hi Rafal, > > > > It seems to me that you're a bit overloaded, as you didn't find time > > to answer to my pings on 24.7. or 9.8.. So, I'm putting you on hold > > now; this gives me the possibility to process another application now. > > If you have more time, please feel free to ask for continuing your > > application. > > Just curious, is there some kind of standarized way to put on hold to > some applicant? I mean, I have seen some other AM's putting on hold > after periods of six months or more, so I find this month period new and > disturbing. Please don't misunderstand what I mean, it is just a curious > question. I think it's largely up to the AM, with perhaps some suggestion from the FD. Most of the holds I've seen have a fairly consistent process, though: after a response delay, the AM pings a couple of times, and in the absence of any useful reply from the applicant, they go on hold. The time period between each event varies, not only from AM to AM but also between holds; this most likely occurs just because the AM doesn't necessarily go through their applicants daily looking for someone to ping at 30 days, or whatever. Personally, it's my opinion that an inability to respond for a period of a month or two would be enough of an indication that the applicant is temporarily unable to proceed, which means it's hold time for them. But the AM giving the applicant an extra couple of months grace isn't going to stuff up the process completely. - Matt
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature