Re. the 2nd WU, with the strange name (20101013232142_faah16346_ZINC03860779_WT2md01450CTP_00):
If I spot one of these, or any regular WU that is the first that I've received of a new batch, I start it running immediately. I figure that if some of us do this it will give the techs early warning of problems with the new batch, and will minimise the number of bad WUs that get sent out before problems are detected and thus save wasted crunching time. My policy had never hit a "jackpot" until 9 Oct ... STOP new FAAH batch - faah16199 - faah16201 -...ash at startup [Resolved], when I was the first of (how many members crunching FAAH?) to report a problem. In this case, I don't know whether the flow of bad WUs was stopped any sooner than if I hadn't reported the problem, because it was a weekend. At least our ever-vigilant CA Sekerob was able to verify my findings and get messages to the techs sooner than would have been the case had I not prioritised the first WUs from the new batch (FAAH Experiment 34).

So my suggestion is that if you spot a WU that has an unusual name or is among the first few that you have received from a new batch or experiment, you give it priority.