| |
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
> Mookie wrote:
> >
> > Ok Larry, (or anyone else) what do you think we should change?? I'm up
> > for changes in it.. I just want something that will keep these boxes
> > moving and not to all the same people, We've got people on the lists
> > that have never received a box yet... and some <me included> who have
> > received all that they wanted too.. I don't think that's fair.
>
> I agree. Your proposed rule doesn't address the problem, though, which I
> see as this: We did things first come first served. That's usually fair.
> But in this case, what it resulted in was the following:
>
> Person A discovered this thing. Person A asks to be put on all the
> lists.
> Person B ditto, person C ditto, person D ditto...
>
> and you end up with a bunch of the lists having almost the same people
> in almost the same order.
I've already tried to take care of most of this, that's why you'll find
the lists aren't in exact order as they are on the sign up list, though
that was agreed to long ago. though I like your idea of just moving the
people around.. that's basically what I was going to do with the GB1 to
4 and 5 list move..
> But your rule IS good in theory. I ain't the expert on what exactly
> isn't workable but something about tracking who has what and determining
> who to send to next based on whether someone has a box or not strikes me
> as a bit hard to administer centrally and a bit unworkable for a person
> deciding where to send a box... try working some scenarios and you'll
> see what I mean.
I don't see this as a problem.. you have to go the page to see who to
send it to next, you take a quick scan at the other lists, if their name
is up on another list you ask if they have that box or if it's on it's
way, if so, pick the next person, if not, send it to them. This also
requires you sending them in a timely manner and POSTING that it's been
sent, so they know it's coming if they get mail from someone on the
other list asking if they have any boxes or any on their way. That's
basically how I was thinking it would work? am I off base? is this too
hard for people to understand and comply with?
> I am brainstorming, that's not the only answer by all means.
same here :) this has been a test, so far I think parts of it have
worked out great, others... we'll.. we need to do a little tweaking :) I
don't think it's anything that we can't deal with and work out though :)
>
> --
> Larry Pieniazek larryp@novera.com http://my.voyager.net/lar
> - - - Web Application Integration! http://www.novera.com
> fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to lugnet.
>
> NOTE: Soon to be lpieniazek@tsisoft.com :-)
--
Keep on Bricken'
-Tamy
Follow the bouncing boxes!
http://home.att.net/~mookie1/jambalaya.html
http://home.att.net/~mookie1/
http://mookie.iwarp.com/ (mirror site)
Lego isn't a toy, it's a way of life!
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
25 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
