Subject: Event Spam..???

From: Chander Ganesan <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 11:47:36 -0400

Hello,

I just noticed the following events posted:

Unknown <http://www.postgresql.org/about/event.497>
Date: *2007-09-22 -- 2008-12-04* Location: *Unknown, Unknown, Dominican 
Republic*
Posted by [email-masked]*
a camp band <http://jabiki.hotbox.ru> aagps <http://pebiju.hotbox.ru> a 
slut wife <http://pezoji.hotbox.ru> a midsummers night dream quotes 
<http://lepini.hotbox.ru> a family <http://ketaby.hotbox.ru> more... 
<http://www.postgresql.org/about/event.497>

Unknown <http://www.postgresql.org/about/event.498>
Date: *2008-03-17 -- 2009-08-29* Location: *Unknown, Unknown, Montserrat*
Posted by [email-masked]*
a security problem occurred <http://myxifa.front.ru> a+ questions free 
<http://tesezi.front.ru> aantal inwoners amsterdam 
<http://geqysa.front.ru> a7 envelope template <http://nykeli.front.ru> a 
job title <http://comege.front.ru> more... 
<http://www.postgresql.org/about/event.498>

I'm assuming they aren't there intentionally...

Also, I notice a lot of events in the training database that seem to be 
dedicated more to "lead generation" than a reasonable effort to run a 
training course.  For example, 'Certfirst' lists PostgreSQL courses 
throughout the US in a wide range of different cities.  It is my belief 
that these courses listings are designed not to actually offer a wide 
range of courses, but to maintain a "main page" list of courses to 
generate leads.  Is this an acceptable practice?  I'd hate to see a 
bunch of vendors adopting this practice to be competitive....

It seems to me that such a practice would not be to the benefit of the 
community - since it wouldn't help community members find events that 
were actually running - rather it would put them in touch with companies 
that could add them to their marketing databases (or they'd get taken 
with a "bait and switch" - where they sign up for a class in the 
Bahamas, but end up being redirected to a course in Chicago).

Also, how about putting a disclaimer on the training pages indicating 
that the listing of training courses doesn't constitute the endorsement 
of a company by the PG community - and that customers should do their 
own due diligence to ensure they get what they pay for.  I think many 
customers look at a listing of training and consider it to be an 
endorsement by the community..

Thanks

-- 
Chander Ganesan
The Open Technology Group
One Copley Parkway, Suite 210
Morrisville, NC  27560
Phone: 877-258-8987/919-463-0999
http://www.otg-nc.com

---

From: Dave Page <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 17:00:05 +0100

> Unknown <http://www.postgresql.org/about/event.497>

<snip>

Err, how did you see these? They haven't been approved for publishing.

Regards, Dave

---

From: Chander Ganesan <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 12:02:34 -0400

> Err, how did you see these? They haven't been approved for publishing.
http://www.postgresql.org/about/eventarchive

---

From: Dave Page <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 17:37:55 +0100

> http://www.postgresql.org/about/eventarchive

Ooops, thanks fixed.

Regards, Dave.

---

From: Chander Ganesan <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 12:39:45 -0400

>> http://www.postgresql.org/about/eventarchive

Cool.  Any word on the latter part of my email? ;-)

thanks

chander

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 10:06:05 -0700

> endorsement by the community..

We would have to do it on the:

news page
consultants page
hosting page
contributors page

I understand and appreciate the point, but I think it would cause a 
reverse effect that may not be positive.

Joshua D. Drake

-- 

       === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive  PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
              http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/

---

From: Dave Page <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 18:13:07 +0100

> Bahamas, but end up being redirected to a course in Chicago).

I agree it's not good if that is what they are doing, but do you have
any proof? How would we distinguish between that, and say a dozen
courses put on by EnterpriseDB, Command Prompt or OTG?

> endorsement by the community..

I haven't gone quite that far, but following a discussion with Magnus I
have added a line saying that PGDG doesn't endorse any third part events.

Thanks, Dave.

---

From: Chander Ganesan <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 14:03:08 -0400

> courses put on by EnterpriseDB, Command Prompt or OTG?
I see your point.  However, perhaps there is some other mechanism or 
restriction that can be put in place to limit the likelihood of this 
(one course of one type per month, a limitation on annual courses 
listed, or a "per listing" fee charged to not-for-free companies)?  Such 
restrictions would at least limit abuse to some extent..  Or perhaps 
limiting listed courses to states where companies are registered as 
corporations...   Such information is freely available, and it could be 
required that companies provide a link to their articles of 
incorporation in the states where they provide training - easy to check 
without undue work on those that filter events... 

If others (ourselves included) are forced to take the same action to be 
competitive then it results in a reduction in the usefulness of the 
tool.  One could argue that removing it entirely to prevent abuse would 
be less disruptive than having PG related companies flounder due to the 
actions of a few "bad citizens".
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>

---

From: Dave Page <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 20:06:52 +0100

> without undue work on those that filter events... 

Limiting the number of listings is not in our interests - we want to
show how much PostgreSQL is being used. Perhaps more importantly, how
*widely*. We'd want to list courses running in every state, even if they
were all the same company.

Charging would almost certainly cause us problems given our financial
status. I suspect we could 'solicit donations', but that would obviously
not have the desired effect.

Limiting to the states in which companies are registered is a nonsense
as well - what about a company in Japan? How do we check them? Or what
about EnterpriseDB UK Ltd for example who cover the whole EMEA region -
would they (== we in case you didn't realise I work for them) be
restricted to listing courses in England because that's where we're
registered?

Don't misunderstand - I'm not trying to dodge the issue. I just don't
think there's a straightforward solution :-(

> actions of a few "bad citizens".

Let's remember that there are no proven 'bad citizens'. Unless that
should change, for you to 'take the same action' would mean scheduling
more legitimate courses - which I'd welcome :-)

Regards, Dave.

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 12:22:11 -0700

> Limiting the number of listings is not in our interests - we want to

It is, if the listings are not legitimate.

> not have the desired effect.

No it wouldn't because the larger the donation the higher up the page 
the person would expect to be.

> restricted to listing courses in England because that's where we're

Perhaps a requirement that a link to the actual registration page for 
the class? Listing the details of where the class is etc...

>> actions of a few "bad citizens".

Agreed.

> more legitimate courses - which I'd welcome :-)

Agreed.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
>        subscribe-nomail command to [email-masked] so that your
>        message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
> 

--

---

From: Chander Ganesan <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 15:42:46 -0400

> were all the same company.
However, corporate marketing is not a quantifiable metric as to usage.  
I'd argue that the number of courses offered has no bearing on how 
widely or how much PostgreSQL is being used.
> not have the desired effect.
Charging (or requiring a sizable donation to get "front page" status) 
would provide a commercial entity an incentive to offer genuine events.  
We already make fairly regular donations through SPI (btw, I was told 
there would be a donors page at some point...any ideas as to when that 
might appear?), and I doubt that any commercial organization that makes 
a profit from PG would be loathe to donate 50% of the "per-head cost" 
for 1 student or something along those lines for each event 
listed....especially when they expect that they'll run a class with a 
lot more than a single student.
> restricted to listing courses in England because that's where we're
Yep, it's not nearly a perfect solution...
> more legitimate courses - which I'd welcome :-)
Understood. 

Chander Ganesan
Open Technology Group, Inc.
One Copley Parkway, Suite 210
Morrisville, NC  27560
Phone: 877-258-8987/919-463-0999

---

From: Dave Page <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 20:50:39 +0100

> It is, if the listings are not legitimate.

Well, yes - I think that's a given.

> the person would expect to be.

Listings move up the page in chronological order so that the closest
events are at the top. Ordering the page based on the donation given
would make it horrendous to use for the people that actually might want
training.

> the class? Listing the details of where the class is etc...

I thought those were a given as well, but it doesn't hurt to be reminded.

Regards, Dave

---

From: Chander Ganesan <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 16:09:27 -0400

> would make it horrendous to use for the people that actually might want
There is a good medium - charge (donate) for front page spaces (and just 
divide the donation amount by the time until the course and give the 
highest ratio the best spots) and leave the "training event" page in 
chronological order (or do a google and put the "sponsored" ones at the 
top in a different color, etc).

Chander Ganesan

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 13:22:03 -0700

> would make it horrendous to use for the people that actually might want

Sure that was my point :). It is a bad idea to try it from a donation 
perspective.

> I thought those were a given as well, but it doesn't hurt to be reminded.

Well I meant from a, we check the page before we approve the listing idea.

Joshua D. Drake

--

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 16:37:18 -0700

> might appear?), and I doubt that any commercial organization that makes 

That's on me. There is some disagreement on how it should be done.

Joshua D. Drake

--

---

From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 08:28:09 -0400

On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 04:09:27PM -0400, Chander Ganesan wrote:

> top in a different color, etc)

That's pretty thin ice we're on, as I understand it.  Making a direct
link between announcement position and how much someone paid is in
fact a case of selling paid advertising, and that's a sticky area for
a non-profit to be in.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan  | [email-masked]
This work was visionary and imaginative, and goes to show that visionary
and imaginative work need not end up well. 
		--Dennis Ritchie