Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.187]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C0DD9FB8D2 for ; Wed, 24 Oct 2007 02:40:55 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.187]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 05083-05 for ; Wed, 24 Oct 2007 02:40:48 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from svr2.hagander.net (svr2.hagander.net [88.198.128.226]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C02B99FB5AB for ; Wed, 24 Oct 2007 02:40:49 -0300 (ADT) Received: from dynamic.hagander.net ([127.0.0.1]) (encrypted and authenticated) by svr2.hagander.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32F9EDCC97C; Wed, 24 Oct 2007 07:40:48 +0200 (CEST) From: "Magnus Hagander" To: josh@agliodbs.com CC: "Robert Treat" , pgsql-www@postgresql.org, "Joshua D. Drake" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Message-ID: <200710240740360000@3228930778> Subject: Re: Training events policy ... first test case Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 07:40:35 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200710/135 X-Sequence-Number: 12722 > > Also, given enough companies and bad scheduling luck, you can > > always get bumped off the main page, so I think we should approve them > > all. > > They problem is that we *know* we have companies who are scheduling > training sessions which will never be held, in order to keep their names > in that "top 3". Maybe we need to revisit how training events are listed > on the home page? If we _know_ they do this why don't we put a clear policy on what's allowed (which we should do anyway) and if they break that we limit them to _zero_ posts for a couple of months until they start complying? Unrelated, we could change the frontpage to only show the first event per company. The rest would only be listed on the details page. /Magnus