From: "Dave Page" <dpage@postgresql.org>
To: "Robert Treat" <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>
CC: pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org, "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg@turnstep.com>,
	pgsql-www@postgresql.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
Message-ID: <200708042208370000@1363317109>
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] We need an Advocacy wiki
Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2007 22:08:37 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit


> ------- Original Message -------
> From: Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>
> To: "Dave Page" <dpage@postgresql.org>
> Sent: 04/08/07, 21:19:54
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [pgsql-www] We need an Advocacy wiki
> 
> Geez Dave, you seem awefully bitter about this 

Not at all.

> (And given I've cleaned up 
> plenty of spam/junk in our website, sometimes 100+ at a time, and it 
> generally involves nothing more than a few sql commands, I'm not sure why)

If it's from the same batch, then yes, you can often do this.

> But in any case, none of that stuff propogated out to the main website, which 
> was the whole point of this; keeping vandalism/mischief out of public view. 

See Magnus' comment... Not that I think that's the point.

> I 
> think were capable of accomplishing that (though I guess you think it we're 
> much closer to the edge...)

All too often new volunteers fail to keep interest. Virtually all website moderation is done by the same 4 or so people, all of whom are very longterm contributors and have been doing it for years.

I for one don't mind doing the moderation work, but I 'm wary of new ideas which may eventually become part of that work if the initial folks lose interest. I don't think that's unreasonable.

/D