Proposed change to clarify UR closure timelines

Coordinator: orbitc & ARC: Banished
------------------------------------------------------------

Moderators: delilush, orbitc, banished

Proposed change to clarify UR closure timelines

Postby tenetienne » Wed Aug 01, 2018 8:54 pm

There has never really been a defined step-by-step process of how we determine when a UR should be either marked as Solved or Not Identified. After assisting in the Manhattan UR update this summer, I decided to copy and modify their UR process for use in other states. {Thinking of New England} Instead of calling it a 1-4-7 process, I decided to use X-4-Y.
The X designates the time window editors hope to use for the length of time from when the reporter posts their UR until the time an editor starts working on it. Some states use 1 day, others, such as us here in New England use 36 hours. After that, there seems to be a general standard of waiting for at least 4 days before editors will comment in the UR asking the reporter for more, or any, information. The Y date is determined by the rules of the state. This wouldn’t be just dropped on each state’s page as is, it would have the X and Y values set for the state where it is being applied.

The X-4-Y system for working on URs
When editors have enough information to solve a UR without additional reporter input
• Editor opens the UR within 36 hours of it being posted in WME. {Or whatever the time window is that was decided on.}
• Editor identifies the problem,
• Editor is able to solve it
• Editor posts a comment in the UR informing the reporter of the resolution and clicks “MARK as SOLVED,” then clicks Send and saves it.
• Editor is finished.

URs that are not clear and require additional information from the reporter.
Day 1
• This is when the editor opens the UR and decides more information is needed.
• Editor opens the UR and determines more information is needed in order to solve the problem.
• Editor posts a comment in the UR asking the reporter to clarify the problem and clicks Send.
⁃ If editor receives a reply and still needs more information, return to the beginning of Day 1.
⁃ If editor can now solve the UR, return to the very top of this section When editors have enough information to solve a UR without additional reporter input and finish the process.
⁃ If editor doesn’t receive a reply, wait until the 4th day after not receiving a reply and go to the Day 4 section.

Day 4
• If it has been 4 days since the editor requested a response from the reporter:
• Post a reminder comment in the UR that the editor is waiting to hear back from the reporter.
• If editor receives a reply and still needs more information, return to the Day 1 section.
• If editor is now able to solve the UR, return to the very top of this section When editors have enough information to solve a UR without additional reporter input and finish the process.
• if editor does not receive a reply, go to the Day Y section.

Day Y
• If it has been Y days since the editor posted the reminder and there has been no response from the reporter:
• If editor cannot solve the UR, post a comment to that effect and click “MARK as NOT IDENTIFIED,” click Send and save it.
⁃ Editor is finished.
• If editor is sure they have solved the UR but were simply waiting for confirmation from the reporter, post a comment in the UR to the effect the issue has been resolved and click “MARK as SOLVED,” click Send and save it.
⁃ Editor is finished.
tenetienne
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 4:58 pm
Location: Marlborough, MA
Has thanked: 107 times
Been thanked: 26 times

Re: Proposed change to clarify UR closure timelines

Postby moogonk » Fri Aug 03, 2018 7:27 pm

Hi, tenetienne.

Thanks for working to make this process more clear.

Are you proposing to change the text on the NER state pages with the language in your post? Or is that just an explanation of your thinking on the UR response matters?

I think a major cause of the confusion we see around this issue is the abbreviation of the response standards. We take something that takes several lines on a wiki page to explain, and boil it down to "X-Y-Z". I'm not blaming you, tenetienne; that's a very common way of describing UR response timing among editors (as you know, we try to abbreviate everything!). Using X-Y-Z often leads to confusion because those numbers are interpreted differently by different people (I refer you to the discussion in NH Discord the other evening as an example). I'd rather that we refer others to the state wiki page for a full explanation, rather than a X-Y-Z statement.

I think that the NH Wiki page describes our standards/process clearly and succinctly. However, if you have specific edits to propose to that or any other wiki page, I look forward to discussing those.
Moogonk
[ img ]Multi-State Manager--Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont

Rank 5 Resident New Hampshire State Manager


Sometimes you avoid the jam, sometimes you are the jam, and sometimes it's faster to go through the jam. - AndyPoms
moogonk
State Manager
State Manager
 
Posts: 535
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 2:24 am
Location: New Hampshire, USA
Has thanked: 235 times
Been thanked: 120 times

Re: Proposed change to clarify UR closure timelines

Postby Robert04101 » Fri Aug 03, 2018 7:58 pm

The New Hampshire process layout matches how I think about the UR management. I'm not sure what refinement the OP is intending on this process. Could you explain, Stephen?

In Maine my preference would be to use 1.5-4-4. In my experience, we either see a fairly prompt response from a UR ping or none at all. I can't recall ever seeing a response 5 to 7 days later. So when editing in Maine, please use 1.5-4-4 unless our RC/ARC decide there is a need for a coordinated regional policy.
Robert04101
State Manager
State Manager
 
Posts: 253
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2012 12:02 pm
Location: Portland, ME
Has thanked: 107 times
Been thanked: 113 times


Return to US New England

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users