MOZART: MOC to MOSID (Merged Topics)

[Jungle]

It's all because of the PER form. One of the evaluation criteria is "promote change" or "manage change" or something like that... Everybody wants to change something every year so they can get the points on their PER. The problem is, the boxes are too small on the form, so they could not add the rest of the text: "... when necessary and in an intelligent way".  >
The MOSID appeared when the trg system course loading migrated to "MITE". With the new software, they use MOSID (Don't know why) and now they are making everybody else adapt...

 

[George Wallace]

This really is getting ridiculous.

Just like RCEME.  They were RCEME, then they became LORE, then they became LEME, or was it the other way around, and then EME........but all along we just kept calling them R(C)EME. 

I still call a newbie a TQ3, even after it became QL3 and whatever after that.  Now I am asked if I am PQ qual and DP6A qual and I don't know what the heck I am (on Paper).  BQ, SQ, and all that crap is just to confuse us and entrench the Officers in the new "Officers Army" >

Confused in.......where was I again?

Change for the sake of change is retarded and wasteful.  If it ain't broke, don't fix it.  The cliches that could be said.


GW

 

[CdnGalaGal]

I still call a newbie a TQ3, even after it became QL3 and whatever after that.   Now I am asked if I am PQ qual and DP6A qual and I don't know what the heck I am (on Paper).   BQ, SQ, and all that crap is just to confuse us and entrench the Officers in the new "Officers Army" >

I don't see MOSID to be merely a change in acronyms. For sure, TQ = GMT = QL2 = BRT = BMQ (I think that is how it goes), is lengthy and dumb because all that changes is the NAME. The course itself remains the same (yes that opens up a whole other topic, but let's pretend it's the "same" course for the sake of arguement). Changing acronyms does not enhance any understanding about what is taken from the course. The difference between changing acronyms and changing from MOCs to MOSID codes is that the codes actually express MORE than simply what courses have been taken. They express what knowledge and experience the SOLDIER has taken from the courses that they feel they can actually USE.

 

[Yard Ape]

So MOSID will have a code to represent every possible combination to training & experience that a soldier might have at any given point in his career? And which ever code he fits on any given day is his current MOSID? 

 

[Jungle]

No. For example, Infantry MOSID is 000010. This number simply replaced 031. There is no other MOSID for Infantry.

 

[Infanteer]

For some reason saying "I'm 000010" doesn't have the same sound as saying "I'm 031".  Bastards are trying to deflate everything I've got left....

 

[Jungle]

My mystake: the MOSID is only 5 digits. So Infantry is 00010. In a few years, it will be very cool to say : "I"m zero-ten" !!!  ('cause of course, we only use the last three digits...)
Remember, you should not resist change...  :

 

[Yard Ape]

So MOSID will have a code to represent every possible combination to training & experience that a soldier might have at any given point in his career? And which ever code he fits on any given day is his current MOSID?  

No. For example, Infantry MOSID is 000010. This number simply replaced 031. There is no other MOSID for Infantry.

Right, so now I'm back to the origional question: what is MOSID if not just a name-change program?

 

[George Wallace]

"Right, so now I'm back to the origional question: what is MOSID if not just a name-change program?"

Yardape....It isn't a name-change program--It is a Digit-Change Program!!!   (Don't be showing me your Digit!   ;D)

GW

 

[Infanteer]

I think I'm with Yard Ape et al; I've yet to see a credible rationale for the reason behind what is undoubtably a costly shift in Pers Management.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

I think I'm with Yard Ape et al; I've yet to see a credible rationale for the reason behind what is undoubtably a costly shift in Pers Management.

Is IS rather depressing that they don't run these things past all the corporals in the Army to get their approval first.... ;D

 

[George Wallace]

Well Michael,

There are 10 types of people in the world;

Those who understand binary,

and those who don't ;D

GW

 

[AmmoTech90]

George Wallace,

Should the Infantry be 2 then?  Preceded by a bunch of unneeded place holders?

 

[Spr.Earl]

So what happens with Ammo Techs?
0000? 00 Projo?

 

[George Wallace]

George Wallace,

Should the Infantry be 2 then? Preceded by a bunch of unneeded place holders?

Ah!  But there are no 2's.  Only Ones and Zeros.

Gw

 

[combat_medic]

What is this, Binary Code?

There are 10 types of people; those who understand binary, and those who don't.

 

[AmmoTech90]

So what happens with Ammo Techs?
0000? 00 Projo?

We'd probably be one of the place holders... :

combat_medic: 10 in binary is 2

 

[ackland]

CJ,
    While I see your point for the tech trades i fail to see the relevence for the combat arms trades. To waste all this time and money coming up with new identifiers for peoples qualifications lets spend the money to train the soldiers. Also you speak about the two similar qualified people but one works in the office. Well what happens if that office person is in the reserve world and pushes paper from monday to friday but on the weekend exersise is a crew commander. well the new code will not reflect the accuracy of his experience. The code lables him/her as a paper pusher but in reality that persoon is just as qualified to command a vehicle as any other commander in that regiment. :sniper:

 

[combat_medic]

AmmoTech90: Yeah, I know. It's a joke. You just gave away the punchline.

 

[rdschultz]

Can anybody factor a fairly reasonable guess as to what a program like this would cost?