dw, I'm now realizing how very delinquent I've been in expressing just how sorrowful I am at what you're going through. I handled the re-accreditation for a divisional postdoc program about four years ago, and it was five months of utter fucking hell.

And this was for a program whose administrator was blessedly anal-retentive, who had kept not only the final forms but every scrap of supporting paperwork, with step-by-step instructions for how the research was done to generate that paperwork (including names, titles, phone numbers and email addresses), for everything from the original accreditation almost two decades earlier through every single renewal since then. For one small program that accepts three people a year. And, still, five months of blazing hell. Whenever I think of you having to do this for an entire institution (let alone one as clearly insane, inept, and fatally non-anal-retentive as yours is), on top of all your other job duties, my blood runs cold for you.

I understand how necessary the accreditation process is, but it's crazymaking. And it's never a hundredth as crazymaking for the university presidents and the department chairs as it is for the grunts in the trenches.

Ah...the "jerkoffs upstairs" isn't just for procedurals anymore. I'm sorry about that.

Gronk. Three hour shift and my back hurt so much by the end that I was fighting back tears.

Thanks JZ. The problem isn't that we don't have anal-retentive people around here handling the data (we do, luckily, and they a long time ago decided to put the key pieces of info into a relational, queryable database.) The problem is that we have a bunch of professors who don't know how to write, procrastinate over the writing, and yet want 110% input into everything despite their lack of cooperation with the process.

The problem right now isn't with the data being disorganized but the actual process being sabotaged from on high. On high makes a switch and creates another 20 hours of work.

And oh, we have had four editors (including me) proofing the document and having ongoing arguments in the margins about whether we're using serial commas or not.

Sigh. HULK SMASH.

Day too long. Must leave now. Argh grr grup pow.

And oh, we have had four editors (including me) proofing the document and having ongoing arguments in the margins about whether we're using serial commas or not.

But...of course you must use serial commas.

The serial comma doesn't get enough love.

t /comma traditionalist

If I end up freelance editing this thing, it'll get serial commas.

t sits with AmyLiz

ION, I just got my December issue of Romantic Times Book Club. In October. Within a week of getting the November issues of the other magazines I read. Is it just me or is this a little ridiculous? It's basically reviews of books that hit the shelves in December, so it's not too soon to preorder or make library purchase requests, but if I read it now, there's no way I'm going to still remember that any particular book sounded intriguing 6 weeks from now when I might actually see them in the local B&N.

Serial commas suck. They're for fuddy duddys and maiden aunts and licorice eaters and people who have hard candy in cut glass bowls that melts together into one lump and collects dust.

::pppllbbtt::

See if you ever get a picture of my super short hair.