Re: DAM and NEW queues processing
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 04:45:10PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 23/06/09 at 16:18 +0200, Ana Guerrero wrote:
> > NM process:
> >
> > > - the NM process could be reduced to 5 to 10 questions choosen by the
> > > AM amongst the 50+ questions currently in the NM templates,
> > ...
> >
> > This *might* work if we solve what in my opinion is the main problem here:
> > DDs advocating too early. Actually, if the applicants are ready, they will
> > have few problems with their processes in the current format (it is normal
> > do not know a few questions, nobody knows everything) and it will be result
> > in a reduced exchange of emails: less time for AM, FD and DAM.
> >
> > And we already have DM to avoid the frustration to not being able to upload
> > trivial packaging changes.
> > Now DM has been here for some time, we might consider improve it, but that is
> > another issues.
>
> I've been advocating people "too early" (i.e, I've advocated people so
> that they could start NM, while in the meantime, I wouldn't have
> advocated them for DM). The reason is that the "unassigned applicants"
> list is huge,
Please do not do so, under any circumstances. Yes, the list is long, but
advocating people before they are ready makes the problem worse, in two
ways:
- First, you make the list longer, thereby contributing to the problem
that you are arguing against in the first place.
- Second, if the applicant loses interest somewhat, or is not talented
enough to understand how to properly maintain packages in the long
run, we end up with an NM in the process who requires much more time
than an NM who is, in fact, ready (NMs who have much to learn still
invariably take *much* more time than other NMs). They take up
valuable AM slots for several months -- in most cases long NM
processes are because the NM takes a long time answering the AM,
rather than the other way around -- thereby making people after them
in the queue wait longer than they otherwise would have, thus making
the queue grow.
Frontdesk has in the past already ignored advocacy messages from people
who would advocate applicants too soon, for the above reasons. Please
make sure we won't have to start ignoring your advocacy messages, too.
--
The biometric identification system at the gates of the CIA headquarters
works because there's a guard with a large gun making sure no one is
trying to fool the system.
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/01/biometrics.html
Reply to: