Re: Training approval policy on pg.org
| От | Jonathan S. Katz |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Training approval policy on pg.org |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 792656FB-8B82-4C9A-A8C4-81AD3FAC8A91@excoventures.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Training approval policy on pg.org (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>) |
| Список | pgsql-www |
On Jan 10, 2013, at 3:48 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 9:38 PM, damien clochard <damien@dalibo.info> wrote: >> Le 10/01/2013 19:14, Magnus Hagander a écrit : >>> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 6:45 PM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> It is likely because we have in the past had lots of people advertise >>>>> training in bulk and then end up canceling most of them. >>>> >>>> We did. The policy was specifically to address a couple of companies >>>> who were listing a training event every week, in order to upstage other >>>> training companies. >>> >>> Yes. >>> >>> An honest question to Damien though - do you actually expect to *run* >>> all these training sessions, or are you basicaly doing the same thing >>> - settings up lots of options and then plan to run the most popular >>> ones? >>> >> I understand there might have been a problem before with a couple of >> trolls posting too many unlikely sessions... But this is not what we are >> doing here. We don't believe in the Google pagerank religion. We suck at >> SEO. We don't need to upstage anyone. >> >> We just want to let people know what we plan to do. If that's not >> possible on postgresql.org, well nevermind. We'll find something else to >> do with our time :-) > > Nah, I think we need a policy that actually helps people (both > providers and consumers), without being abuse:able. Not entirely sure > what it is. Maybe we can just increase the numbers now and it won't be > a problem, because the market has matured. Earlier in the thread, Damien suggested allowing 15-20 / quarter. Why not start at 10 /quarter and see what happens? Jonathan
В списке pgsql-www по дате отправления: