2012-12-21, 10:54 AM
In order to follow your recommedations [MENTION=128]Stereo[/MENTION]; they'd have to actually read through every single ticket first just to find the people who are reliable in the first place, plus keep a whole lot of metadata regarding tickets that they just don't have time for. You forget they're not even using their own ticketing system, they're basically renting one from another company, so what they can do with it is rather limited and they clearly don't have ticket system development resources to spend time adding features to it to support changes like that.
This council, like the one before it, is a 'poor mans way' of doing the same thing; vetting who is reliable through an external process and giving them a higher priority queue.
The only way an additional random selection of fresh reports works is if you have an entire extra team doing that while all the original people continue working on tickets in order because otherwise your backlog gets to the point you can't ever catch up, like the last time they gave up and wiped everything. The obvious problem there is that means more headcount which means more money. You could try the logic that 'the same number of items are still being worked because the same number of people are still working tickets' but that is somewhat over simplified because the average age of each ticket increases in proportion to the number of resources allocated to the head as opposed to the tail.
This council, like the one before it, is a 'poor mans way' of doing the same thing; vetting who is reliable through an external process and giving them a higher priority queue.
The only way an additional random selection of fresh reports works is if you have an entire extra team doing that while all the original people continue working on tickets in order because otherwise your backlog gets to the point you can't ever catch up, like the last time they gave up and wiped everything. The obvious problem there is that means more headcount which means more money. You could try the logic that 'the same number of items are still being worked because the same number of people are still working tickets' but that is somewhat over simplified because the average age of each ticket increases in proportion to the number of resources allocated to the head as opposed to the tail.
It's not having what you want - It's wanting what you've got.