+Hynr Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 I wonder if it might help with Premium Member customer satisfaction if there were a mechanism for nudging one’s PQs out to us when they are hung up and we desperately need them. Even if we could just nudge out one or two PQs that we know will arrive too late, then this could be a real blessing. The way I envision this working is that the Pocket Query Table would have another column of checkboxes that would be a high-priority box. Every user would be entitled to push the priority of two PQs on any one day and they would automatically reset to blank after the scheduled run is made. I think this could be very effective because many PQs in the system (perhaps most) are running on a schedule as maintenance and do not need a rush. Giving the customer some control over prioritization would lead to improved satisfaction without increasing any dissatisfaction. In the end the same number of PQs are generated and delivered, but more users are satisfied. Link to comment
+Yamar Posted July 7, 2005 Share Posted July 7, 2005 A counter proposal that I think more people would approve of would be to allow some PQs be marked as "not a priority". I have quite a number that I'd mark that way if there was a mechanism to do so. EG, I have PQs that send me all my found caches (for reasons I won't explain here). I certainly don't need those run at the top of the queue, but yet since I run them once a week they come fairly early in the day. Link to comment
+tozainamboku Posted July 7, 2005 Share Posted July 7, 2005 Jeremy himself has suggested this. Link to comment
+sbell111 Posted July 7, 2005 Share Posted July 7, 2005 Wouldn't human nature cause most (or all) PQs to be set to a high priority? Link to comment
Jeremy Posted July 7, 2005 Share Posted July 7, 2005 I have been considering a similar option. The idea would be to auto-create a new Pocket Query that essentially just copies all values from the old query to a new one, archiving the original. This would bump it up to the front. I also agree that people would just up the priority on their PQs. The human interaction of actually having to click bump the query would be a much more elegant solution. I'll do my best to get this one integrated sooner than later. I'm currently working on the Instant Cache Notification stuff so I'll play with this during a break from the other coding. Link to comment
+Hemlock Posted July 7, 2005 Share Posted July 7, 2005 The human interaction of actually having to click bump the query would be a much more elegant solution. I wonder how many people would just write a script to auto-click for them Link to comment
+Moose Mob Posted July 7, 2005 Share Posted July 7, 2005 <snip>I'll play with this during a break from the other coding. Taking a break from coding to work on different code? If I wasn't so familiar with this concept, it would be funny. Link to comment
robertlipe Posted July 7, 2005 Share Posted July 7, 2005 The human interaction of actually having to click bump the query would be a much more elegant solution. I wonder how many people would just write a script to auto-click for them There are all kinds of ways you could legislate the priority if it were user adjustable. It's a pretty classic scheduling/starvation problem. But I agree with Jeremy that a single "i need this soonish, please" button (perhaps it can be used only once a day) solves the interesting case. Besides, Folks writing scripts can already do exactly what Jeremy just described. :-) "You see, most blokes will be playing at 10... What we do, is if we need that extra push over the cliff...Eleven. One louder." Nigel. Spinal Tap Link to comment
+ibycus Posted July 7, 2005 Share Posted July 7, 2005 A counter proposal that I think more people would approve of would be to allow some PQs be marked as "not a priority". I like this. I can think of a few of mine that I'd mark as "not a priority" just as long as I get them sooner or later, I really don't care, but I do want them eventually... Really silly idea that just came to me... Maybe something similar to what you could do in some games, where you have a certain number of 'credits' to spread out among different attributes (like intelligence, agility, strength etc). You could do the same thing, and spread out the priority 'credits' that you put on each query. Link to comment
+Yamar Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 Maybe something similar to what you could do in some games, where you have a certain number of 'credits' to spread out among different attributes (like intelligence, agility, strength etc). You could do the same thing, and spread out the priority 'credits' that you put on each query. I like that idea a lot. You get credit for up-moves by registering some of your caches as down-priority moves. [of course I can see people creating queries they don't need just to get the up-moves] Link to comment
Recommended Posts