Ron
Without wishing to get contentious...or, in fact to Rain on Your Parade...I must point out that you are making a fundamental Statistical error in considering the use of the Constant "SNAFU" in respect of any calculated Performance outcomes made by ANY Government Department...from Whatever Country.
The application of "SNAFU, as a fixed negative Constant to any performance equation is unsafe...it is a negative constant and can only lead to a single outcome...ie, 2 negatives = 1 positive, whilst a negative and a positive mostly yield a negative. The outcome of 2 negatives is not desirable when Government Outcomes are viewed by the Public...positive results are unheard of.
This is far too definitive for Government work. Their Statistical reporting needs to clearly reflect the Target Audience and the result they wish to portray.
For instance, when reporting to Parliamentary (Congressional) Committees, they need to always adopt a perceived positive outcome...it is necessary to do this when defending a rat-sh*t performance, to seek additional Staff or to justify huge expenditures and/or pay rises....But, I stress here that there are no other circumstances that require Public Sector analysts to declare positive outcomes...it is against their religion.
Similary, when reporting to the media, they need to show superhuman effort has been made 100% of the time with outstanding outcomes for all endeavors.
And yet, they also need to maintain a rock-solid negative posture to compensate for any remote possibility of face to face interaction with the clients (us) they theoretically work for.........
Thus "SNAFU" as a constant is practically useless, it is, after all a
Constant and thus is totally abhorrent to Public Sector heirarchies, as mentioned above, the only Constant in their World is lifetime job security, endless pay-rises and minimal work output. To apply "Constant" to any part of their performance equation is contentious, unsafe and Statistically misleading.
What has become the modern thinking in Public Sector reporting, is the application of "Finagles" Constant. This is a unique Statistical Driver invented by the Public Sector to more clearly give wriggle room in appropriate Key Performance Indicators.
What, I hear you ask, is so special/different about "Finagles" Constant.......
Well, this little statistic miracle is entirely unique in that it is a
VARIABLE CONSTANT....ie it can be applied to modify the practical outcome of any performance standard to exactly fit with the needs of the Statistic in whatever forum it is being debated...............
Thus, in Pineaus excellent example, if left to a normal iterative decay, the outcomes very closely descend to infinite loops...but not quite close enough for Government work, there is still a little room for a random, microscopic statistical positive outcome (extremely small, I grant you but nevertheless it is there and would be of considerable embarrassment to Public Servants were it to leak out in General Statistical outcomes)
Thus, the application of Finagles Constant to the outcome formulaes, more clearly pushes them in the right direction, dependant on the target audience....and in fact, the application of Finagles Constant actually mandates the infinite loop outcome that is the Key Driver of Public Sector Performance Standards...QED !!!
I am sure you will not mind my highjacking your statistical Theory here, I just wanted to set the record straight
