This is less of a complaint about a specific mod action and more a request to think about altering the way in which applications are reviewed. I realize that applications at this moment are approved/reviewed in a sort of rolling basis; if an application is turned in early, there's a good chance that it'll be reviewed prior to one submitted later, although there is per se no guarantee, exceptions being (most likely) when a couple of moderators are very familiar with a canon and happen to vote on a later app such that it's approved earlier. However I think that this method of reviewing applications lends itself to a very problematic situation for those whose applications are reviewed late, and oftentimes much later than applications which are perhaps submitted a few days afterward.

I would then like to suggest that application reviews be dealt out in chronological order. I think that this would create an incentive for the moderators to actually review some apps which they're reluctant to review on a timely basis (because maybe someone has a stellar app later from a canon which, arbitrarily, the mods happen to know or play). I think that the reasons behind using the current system of rolling stamps doesn't actually serve a positive purpose, outlined as such:

• Some may say that the reason why some apps are reviewed more slowly is because moderators don't know the canon. In this case, I would contend that setting the application aside isn't going to help at all, unless mods delay in this manner to actually go out there and read/watch/play the canon, which I find... unlikely. At best, you displace the time that you'd spend waffling over the application. At worst, you invite the sort of procrastinating which I'm pretty sure all of us fall victim to.
  
  
• Some may say that the reason why some apps are reviewed more slowly is because the moderators disagree on how the app should be reviewed. I don't see this as a justified reason to slow down the process, though, nor necessarily that accurate--given that apps are decided on a two-mod agreement basis (or so I've heard). I don't think that such disagreement/discussion should really go on longer than a day or so anyway, because... in the end, it's an app, you can't know for certain whether the player will be awesome or a wanker or OOC, so added time doesn't really make the judgment all that much better.
  
  
• Some may say that the first part (that mods don't know the canon) may be ameliorated by delaying of the judgment because that would allot more time for peer reviews. However, I don't see why apps with obscure canons necessarily deserve to be swayed more by peer reviews than apps with popular, mod-known canons (as the peer review page does state that reviews are just meant to aid in a decision, not make or break one). And in fact, if this should be the argument, I think that making the timing of judgments chronological should make the urgency of peer reviewing much more predictable, in that if an app you desperately know you need to review is about third or fourth on the queue, you can quickly type one up and send it in.