View previous topic | View next topic

Queues

Page 1 of 2
Goto page 1, 2  Next

tetsabb
1284830.  Wed May 23, 2018 4:18 am Reply with quote

I remember seeing such dresses in period dramas on TV as a kid, and thinking that some women had enormous bums, until I was advised otherwise.

 
Gabby Lister
1287206.  Sun Jun 17, 2018 5:29 pm Reply with quote

The world record for the longest queue for the toilet is 756 people, it was a record set in Brussels to raise awareness and funds for pumps, wells and better hygiene education for people in third world countries.

https://metro.co.uk/2009/03/23/belgium-sets-world-record-toilet-queue-570491/

I reckon my school breaks this on the regular.

 
Jenny
1287210.  Sun Jun 17, 2018 5:42 pm Reply with quote

That dress is surely late 19th century, not late 19th century?

 
crissdee
1287213.  Sun Jun 17, 2018 5:58 pm Reply with quote

I think I know what you meant there Jenny!

 
Jenny
1287266.  Mon Jun 18, 2018 11:00 am Reply with quote

Sorry that was a bit random wasn't it? I was referring to the picture in post 1284754

 
crissdee
1287286.  Mon Jun 18, 2018 12:38 pm Reply with quote

Yeah but;

Jenny wrote:
That dress is surely late 19th century, not late 19th century?


?????????

 
tetsabb
1287319.  Mon Jun 18, 2018 9:14 pm Reply with quote

crissdee wrote:
Yeah but;

Jenny wrote:
That dress is surely late 19th century, not late 19th century?


?????????

Quite!!!

 
Jenny
1287367.  Tue Jun 19, 2018 9:39 am Reply with quote

Oh duh! Typo. 'yorz said it was late 1700s and to me it looks a hundred years later. I meant to write late 19th not late 18th.

 
DVD Smith
1290422.  Tue Jul 17, 2018 10:07 am Reply with quote

According to this BBC article, the reputation of the British as "a nation of patient queuers" was shaped in World War II. During this time, when rationing was in effect, people would often join the back of a queue without knowing what it was for, just in the hope that it was for something useful.

However, an article in the New York Tribune dated June 26th 1921 describes it as already a part of the British mindset - attributed to rationing from the First World War instead. [1]

Quote:
There is apparently some fundamental of British psychology that demands queueing into orderly lines when two or more are gathered together in one place for some common purpose. London's crowds queue for tickets of any kind, from a hat check stand to a cricket match. Orderly queues form at the fixed points along the street where the buses stop; more queues appear on the subway platforms opposite the point where the car door will open. During the rationing period of the war London learned to queue for bread, butter, sugar and meat cards, and the instinct still prevails. Even the punters and rowers on the upper reaches of the Thames queue their small craft into lines when they wait to enter the river locks. Give a Londoner a line and he'll queue himself.

That article is talking about the old 19th/20th-century London tradition of letting people queue up for theatre tickets on the day of the performance, and a movement to abolish it. Every day, the West End would see multiple queues of hundreds or even thousands of working-class people, all desperate to get in to see the performances. The reason for this was that the majority of the pit and gallery seats would not be available for sale in advance and would only go on sale two hours before the start of the show. [2]

 
Bondee
1290431.  Tue Jul 17, 2018 10:43 am Reply with quote

Somebody must've mentioned this elsewhere on the forum, but "queue" is the only word that is pronounced the same when 80% of its letters are removed.

 
DVD Smith
1290436.  Tue Jul 17, 2018 10:53 am Reply with quote

One long winding queue is faster then multiple short ones.

For a shop with multiple cashpoints side by side, waiting times are much shorter when the shop uses a single winding line (called a serpentine line) rather than a different queue for each till. This is because if one person takes ages when paying for something then the people behind can just move past them to the next available cashpoint.

This is another finding from Dr Richard Larson, as reported here.

 
nathanvanwyk
1295746.  Wed Sep 19, 2018 4:15 am Reply with quote

Men are more likely to give up on a queue than women. Men start to inflate the amount of time they believe they have waited after two minutes. Women give it three minutes.
The term “faffing” refers to the time delay when a person gathers their things after paying at checkout. The average faffing time is 3.17 seconds.
Once a wait lasts longer than three minutes, the perceived wait time multiplies with each passing minute. After five minutes pass, perceived wait time is doubled.
A shopper or manager can calculate the expected wait time in any queue using Little’s Law, the formula created by John D.C. Little. The formula is: Average Wait Time = Average Number of People in Line ÷ Arrival Rate. For example, if there are 8 people already in line with about 2 customers entering the line per minute, the average wait time would be about 4 minutes.
People overestimate their wait time by 23% when they are not told how long their wait will be. For example, if the actual wait time is 13 minutes, people assume it will take around 16 minutes. That’s why we suggest using a sign to tell your customers approximately how long they can expect to wait.
The term “reneging” refers to a customer leaving a queue that they believe they have spent too much time in.
A single-file line leading to three cashiers is about three times faster than one line for each cashier. This is called unified, or single-line queueing, and it’s something we really believe in. Click here for more information on the proven effectiveness of unified queues.
The “balking index” is a scientific formula that calculates the number of people who will abandon the queue (or renege) in a given time. This helps managers determine the number of staff needed to properly service their customers.

Reference: http://blog.linelogic.com/blog/2013/05/29/10-little-known-queueing-facts/

 
DVD Smith
1295751.  Wed Sep 19, 2018 4:54 am Reply with quote

A 2015 study by two professors at the University of Southern Denmark found that the most optimum way to serve a queue is actually "last come, first served", i.e. to serve the back of the queue before the front.

This sounds counter-intuitive, but according to the professors, if people know in advance that the people at the back of the queue get served first, then they don't rush to be there as early as possible but instead arrive at more staggered times. This means the whole operation runs more smoothly, resulting in an overall better experience for everyone.

However, if people don't know in advance that the last-come-first-served rule is in force, you end up with a lot of angry customers who have been waiting a long time.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34153628

 
suze
1295782.  Wed Sep 19, 2018 11:23 am Reply with quote

nathanvanwyk wrote:
A single-file line leading to three cashiers is about three times faster than one line for each cashier. This is called unified, or single-line queueing, and it’s something we really believe in.


I've heard this once or twice before, and I dare say that the good husband would be able to give me the mathematical proof that it is so. (I shall thus not ask him, for fear that he will do so.)

But if it is so, why are supermarkets not usually organized this way? Banks and post offices by now mostly are, and so are the retail outlets of Mr Marks and Mr Spencer. Supermarkets rarely are though. Is this because the people who run them dispute the math, or because they are just being awkward?

 
DVD Smith
1295825.  Thu Sep 20, 2018 4:18 am Reply with quote

suze wrote:
But if it is so, why are supermarkets not usually organized this way? Banks and post offices by now mostly are, and so are the retail outlets of Mr Marks and Mr Spencer. Supermarkets rarely are though. Is this because the people who run them dispute the math, or because they are just being awkward?


Because customers in banks and post offices generally don't have huge trolleys full of a week's worth of groceries in them. Navigating those around a huge snaking single-file queue would probably be more of a hindrance and a hold-up than the time saved by having one queue per cashier.

There's also the question of space - cashiers' desks at supermarkets are much longer than in other shops (with conveyor belt + bagging area) so having individual queues alongside each conveyor belt is presumably a more optimal fit for the limited floorspace available.

 

Page 1 of 2
Goto page 1, 2  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group