Subject: Re: Training events policy ... first test case

From: "Dave Page" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2007 17:03:31 -0000

> ------- Original Message -------
> From: Chander Ganesan <[email-masked]>
> To: [email-masked]
> Sent: 03/11/07, 16:31:33
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] Training events policy ... first test case
> 
> Actually, I think that its not unusual for us to see a few enrollments 
> the week before a class...  so listing classes that are "next week" is a 
> good idea - i'm sure this is a trend seen by all training companies.... 

Here's a possibly crazy idea - how about we remove the 3 or 4 listings from /index.html altogether and replace them with a dynamically generated summary saying something like:

"There are 24 training events in 9 countries scheduled over the next 6 months from OTG, EnterpriseDB, Command Prompt, 2nd Quadrant and others. View the complete schedule to find the PostgreSQL training you want."

The numbers are easy to calcuate of course, and we could just grab 3 or 4 company names randomly.

/D

---

From: Magnus Hagander <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 18:20:36 +0100

> The numbers are easy to calcuate of course, and we could just grab 3 or 4 company names randomly.

I like it. Takes away the whole problem, really. So +1 from me.

//Magnus

---

From: Tom Lane <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 14:15:32 -0400

> "There are 24 training events in 9 countries scheduled over the next 6 months from OTG, EnterpriseDB, Command Prompt, 2nd Quadrant and others. View the complete schedule to find the PostgreSQL trai…

Love it, if not too difficult to implement.  Solves the whole problem.

			regards, tom lane

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 15:36:34 -0300

- --On Saturday, November 03, 2007 14:15:32 -0400 Tom Lane <[email-masked]> 
wrote:

>> Here's a possibly crazy idea - how about we remove the 3 or 4 listings from
>> /index.html altogether and replace them with a dynamically generated summary
>> saying something like:
>
>> "There are 24 training events in 9 countries scheduled over the next 6
>> months from OTG, EnterpriseDB, Command Prompt, 2nd Quadrant and others. View
>> the complete schedule to find the PostgreSQL training you want."
>

That 'from' list could get fairly long, no?  Why not just cut out the 'from' 
part of it, leave it as '24 training events in 9 countries schedualed over the 
next 6 months' and then a click thru to the actual list?

- ----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email . [email-masked]                              MSN . [email-masked]
Yahoo . yscrappy               Skype: hub.org        ICQ . 7615664

---

From: Magnus Hagander <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 19:51:20 +0100

Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> 
> 
> --On Saturday, November 03, 2007 14:15:32 -0400 Tom Lane <[email-masked]> 
> wrote:
> 

Daves suggestion was to pull a couple of company names at random, and
then include the "and others" part. That way you'll get a circulation on
who's listed there without making the list take up half our frontpage.

I like that better than to cut the names completely. Still with click
thru to the actual list, of course.

//Magnus

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 15:55:25 -0300

- --On Saturday, November 03, 2007 19:51:20 +0100 Magnus Hagander 
<[email-masked]> wrote:

>>>> /index.html altogether and replace them with a dynamically generated
>>>> summary saying something like:
>>>> months from OTG, EnterpriseDB, Command Prompt, 2nd Quadrant and others.
>>>> View the complete schedule to find the PostgreSQL training you want."
>> part of it, leave it as '24 training events in 9 countries schedualed over
>> the  next 6 months' and then a click thru to the actual list?
>

That works too

- ----

---

From: Chander Ganesan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 15:17:29 -0400

> I like it. Takes away the whole problem, really. So +1 from me.
I've got mixed feelings about it, for a few reasons:

- The problem, as I see it, is really in culling from the list those 
companies that post training events to achieve one of the following:
    A.  Gain "front page" status by posting events they have no 
intention of running (this definitely addresses that).
    B.  Gan "overwhelming odds" status by listing a whole lots of 
events, the majority of which they never intend to run.  I know of a 
number of different training companies (not all of which offer 
PostgreSQL training) that do the following:
       - List courses in many cities at once for lead generation.
       - Follow up with those leads by "consolidating" them into a 
single class they run in a single city.

Consider that when you advertise on Google if you have three impressions 
per page (say 2 natural search results and a single paid result) your 
leads actually go up by more than a factor of three...the more 
impressions the better results, and the response is non-linear. 

The same thing occurs with the PG training page.  Legitimate providers 
are unable to compete as effectively because they list courses they 
intend to run...and not a mashup of courses designed to generate leads.

The proposal drives people to look at a training page, and limits those 
"front page" impressions.  However it does not address the fact that 
when someone goes to the training page they have to somehow sift through 
an immense amount of courses, many of which may not run, and many of 
which are designed for lead generation, rather than to drive enrollment 
in a single class.

The question is really, how do you weed out the legitimate courses from 
the not-so-legitimate ones?  I think that there isn't a really "good" 
way, and hence some sort of restriction...  Some ideas:

- Have training providers provide the name of their instructors and a 
few references, then limit them to posting courses that those 
instructors would be able to teach (and an instructor can't be in two 
places at once).  This however placed an undue burden on PGDG, since now 
you have to weed out instructors.
- Have providers pay a non-trivial administrative fee to list a course 
($1000 per course listing?) .  A small fee would be a license to ill, a 
larger fee however would serve as a deterrent (and the fee is a 
donation..).  This however places an undue burden on smaller companies 
or companies that are venturing into this area and thus stymies growth.*
- Have providers pay a non-trivial fee for each course over the 8 per 
year free listings.  Say 8 free listings per year, others are $1000 
apiece.  This would allow EDB's and OTG's to legitimately list courses 
they intend to offer, and prevent "spam" type postings.*

My guess is that those folks that aren't legitimate will probably start 
to drop off when they find the cost of using bait and switch techniques 
becomes unfeasible.

8 a month works even better for those growing companies.  They can offer 
lots of courses at the start of the year (back to back, whatever) and if 
they are successful they can pay the fee to continue the practice later 
in the year.

I like the third one, it allows for community growth, and the regular 
courses offered by BNR, Modern, and others.  If a company really plans 
to offer 30+ courses a year and run them, I'm sure that they wouldn't 
mind paying a bit extra...especially considering they are "cleaning up" 
running all those courses with the large frequency.

In general, people, once they enroll or are in contact with a single 
vendor, don't go out of their way to search for something else unless 
their experience (taking a crappy course) drives them elsewhere.  If I 
have someone enroll and tell them that they have to wait until next 
month, or fly to some other city for the course, they won't be 
happy...but more times than not they will most likely do it...since it 
saves them the work of looking elsewhere for training.  It's a sad thing 
to say, but I think its the truth.  An example for us was a Sony 
subdivision company.  They went somewhere else for training and 
absolutely hated it...their training was someone with some unix admin 
experience, but almost no PG experience.  Their course was originally 
scheduled in the LA area, but they ended up having to fly to a different 
city for the course.  At the time, they were even reluctant to provide 
the name of the company, since they were considering pursuing legal 
action to get their money back

When they looked to train other staff they called and gave us the third 
degree, asked for references, asked technical questions, asked about 
experience, etc.  I think if customers did that right off the bat, the 
whole training industry would be a lot smaller.... 

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

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2007 14:21:05 -0700

On Sat, 3 Nov 2007 17:03:31 -0000
"Dave Page" <[email-masked]> wrote:

> > Actually, I think that its not unusual for us to see a few
> > enrollments the week before a class...  so listing classes that are
> > "next week" is a good idea - i'm sure this is a trend seen by all
> > training companies.... 
> 
> Here's a possibly crazy idea - how about we remove the 3 or 4
> listings from /index.html altogether and replace them with a
> dynamically generated summary saying something like:
> 
> "There are 24 training events in 9 countries scheduled over the next
> 6 months from OTG, EnterpriseDB, Command Prompt, 2nd Quadrant and
> others. View the complete schedule to find the PostgreSQL training
> you want."
> 

That is actually pretty cool. 

+1

Joshua D. Drake

> 
> /D
> 
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)--------------------------- 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
> 

- -- 

      === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564   24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL solutions since 1997  http://www.commandprompt.com/
			UNIQUE NOT NULL
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/

---

From: Dave Page <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 23:22:11 +0000

> That is actually pretty cool. 

Thanks.

http://dave.pgadmin.org/

To try it out. Before anyone asks, it does properly handle the case when
there are less than 4 companies with events in the next 6 months and
modifies the text accordingly.

If noone objects, I'll commit in a day or two.

/D

---

From: Chander Ganesan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 20:16:47 -0400

> If noone objects, I'll commit in a day or two.
Perhaps the font size can be reduced so that its more in line with the 
size used for events.  It looks a bit bigger than everything else on the 
page, kind of an eye-draw...

However, I think this brings to the forefront issue #2...that certain 
companies use training events as a lead generation tool...much the same 
way that some companies will post many press releases around the same 
time to generate leads for their products.

I know that there are some "guidelines" for the press release issue, why 
not apply something similar to training events?  Or perhaps the "8 per 
year and pay for more" strategy....with a "per event" fee ($1000 USD in 
the US?) for additional events that varies based on the country of 
incorporation (so Brazilian companies would pay a smaller fee than an 
American one)....

Heck, perhaps even "8 per year per course type"?  So companies would 
have an added incentive to grow their PG offerings (this might be a bit 
one-sided, since AFAIK we offer the widest range of PG courses), but it 
seems like a good strategy to keep things on the up-and-up.  Such a 
strategy would also make sense (IMHO) for folks like EDB, which has a 
couple of courses, and Modern and BNR, that offer their courses only 
sporadically.
> /D
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> 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: Tom Lane <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 21:48:13 -0400

> page, kind of an eye-draw...

I'm not sure if it's the font size or just the fact that it's a big slug
of text, but it does seem a bit dominating.  Maybe we should go with
Marc's suggestion to drop the list of company names.

			regards, tom lane

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2007 20:51:46 -0700

On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 23:22:11 +0000
Dave Page <[email-masked]> wrote:

> To try it out. Before anyone asks, it does properly handle the case
> when there are less than 4 companies with events in the next 6 months
> and modifies the text accordingly.
> 

Kudos on this but I agree with the blob of text argument.. perhaps we
could change:

There are 21 training events in 4 countries scheduled over the next six
months from EnterpriseDB, CertFirst, Open Technology Group and others.
Take a look at our schedule to find the training that you want.

To:

21 events in 4 countries <link over the next six months >.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

- --

---

From: Kevin Hunter <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 00:53:48 -0400

> 21 events in 4 countries <link over the next six months >.

Or perhaps:

In the next six months, there are <link>21 events</link> in 4 countries
from 13 different companies.

Kevin

---

From: Tom Lane <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 01:00:41 -0400

> from 13 different companies.

+1, especially if the number of companies is noticeably more than
three-or-four.

			regards, tom lane

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 01:34:38 -0400

> from 13 different companies.

I like this, reduces the 'pick-n-choose' which companies to choose ...

- ----

---

From: Chander Ganesan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 01:53:35 -0400

> I like this, reduces the 'pick-n-choose' which companies to choose ...

After some further thought, I don't think that doing this is in the best 
interest of the community, or the companies that offer training.  Most 
people learn about training events that might be of interest to them via 
the smattering of courses that are listed on the main page.  Aside from 
those people, there is a small group of people that are actually 
actively looking for training that will go to the "training" page for 
upcoming events.

As such, providers who might want to increase their support for 
PostgreSQL or related products will have less incentive to do so, since 
its unlikely that their courses will even be considered.  For example, 
we offer a "PostgreSQL Performance Tuning" course that focuses on topics 
that would be of interest to experience PostgreSQL administrators.  This 
course is geared at folks who have lots of PG experience - and thus 
aren't interested in training.  We commonly see enrollment for this 
course when the course hits the front page, and little to no enrollment 
in it at other times.  If we offer it a few times and don't get a 
certain enrollment level, we'll just stop offering it.  The same would 
be true of other courses that we offer, such as "Implementing databases 
with PostgreSQL", which we've had specific community requests for on 
-advocacy, but which probably wouldn't get much enrollment in unless it 
hit the front page.

I'm torn on this, on one hand I'm sure the intention is to allow the 
community to grow and prosper as much as possible, while on the other 
hand to take an even-handed approach to the display of upcoming courses 
on the homepage.

What are the chances of adding a course title or two on that display on 
the home page.  For example:

In the next six months, there are <link>21 events</link> in 4 countries
from 13 different companies, including PostgreSQL Administration, and PostgreSQL
Database Implement ion and Performance Tuning events.

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD)
>
> iD8DBQFHLVnu4QvfyHIvDvMRAjXCAKDUPuzLeNBUTNrZMvo1CMiP8JpaqACgjXll
> VoQAz5UMFzfBb1on+3ecd/s=
> =pYpe
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>

---

From: Chander Ganesan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 01:56:04 -0400

> +1, especially if the number of companies is noticeably more than
I'm still opposed to event spam..which everyone seems to conveniently 
ignore when I bring it up. :-( .

How about trying to limit the number of events that a company can have 
on the list at a time?  Say a maximum of 5 events listed at a time?  
That's fairly even handed, and would force folks to post courses that 
they would consider would have some likelihood of running?

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 02:04:22 -0400

> Database Implement ion and Performance Tuning events.

You'd need to go something like:

Over the next 6 months, there are <link>21 courses</link> being offered in 4 
countries, split up as:<p>
<ul>
  <li> 3 - Administration
  <li> 2 - Implementation
  <li> 9 - Tuning
</ul>

Or something like that ...

- ----

---

From: Tom Lane <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 01:15:34 -0500

> ignore when I bring it up. :-( .

Oh, we hear you, we're just not sure what to do about it ...

> they would consider would have some likelihood of running?

I don't much like this one, because it would skew the playing field in
favor of smaller companies.  If there were someone out there able to
field 100 events, but they could only advertise 5, how is that good for
either them or the potential attendees?

Conversely, I think your ultimate concern is with companies that can
really only field 5 events but advertise 100 to see what will happen :-(

Maybe we should try to discourage that sort of gamesmanship by instead
allowing/supporting ad campaigns on the order of "call us, we'll bring
our training to you", or "vote here for course X offered in city Y at
time Z".

			regards, tom lane

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 01:38:15 -0500

> from 13 different companies.

how about "...in <link>4 countries</link>" so that I can look only at
courses in a specific country?

also, how about some text like:

here are some examples of the courses available:
<ul>
[events selected at random limit 5]
</ul>

that way an event has a chance of getting on the front page.

> Kevin

regards,
J
-- 
http://zoidtechnologies.com/ -- software that sucks less

---

From: Josh Berkus <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 20:53:14 +0800

All,

> Take a look at our schedule to find the training that you want.

Sounds good to me.  Can we have a non-US company in there somewhere? 
Maybe Dextra Systemas?

--Josh

---

From: Chander Ganesan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 08:14:37 -0500

> Sounds good to me.  Can we have a non-US company in there somewhere? 
I've got another idea...

18 PostgreSQL Administration
3 PostgreSQL Implementation, Performance & Tuning
2 Implementing Databases with PostgreSQL
And 6 other types

The real estate is definitely there from the old way that events were 
listed, we could show 3 upcoming "course types" with the most recent of 
each type listed.  That allows visitors to see the range of offerings as 
well as some numbers.

I still think that there should be a limit as to the number of courses a 
vendor can list and/or a limit on the number of each type of course (for 
example, dextra could list a maximum of 3 upcoming admin courses, 3 
upcoming intro courses, etc.).  Limiting by type would also encourage 
training vendors to put more effort into offering a range of courses, 
and keep things on the up-and-up from a listing perspective...thus 
preventing event spam.

---

From: Chander Ganesan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 09:03:27 -0500

Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
>

I really like this layout.  It takes out the question of showing a 
company name, which is just wordiness anyways, and then we have to worry 
about equal exposure.  Just list the 3 upcoming courses by type/name/etc 
and then show them on the list.

I *still* think (and am apparently still ignored...) there should be 
limits placed on the number of events a vendor can list...either by 
type, or by vendor.  A vendor is less likely to post "training spam", 
and more likely to post events they really plan to run when they have a 
limit as to their total listings...

---

From: Chander Ganesan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 09:12:05 -0500

> either them or the potential attendees?
First off, I apologize..I didn't see this before I sent out my last 
message (where I said I felt like I was being ignored..).
> really only field 5 events but advertise 100 to see what will happen :-(
That's the gist of it, but I don't see how you can differentiate between 
the two and be "fair". 

I think that if the time came where someone said "this is too 
restrictive, I can field lots of events and want to" then this could be 
revisited.  At present, I don't think there is anyone that can do so.  I 
also don't think the training market for PG events is big enough to 
support such a thing anyways..  Also, keep in mind that this isn't the 
only venue for advertising events.  Lots of other venues exist...  This 
is just one of them...

Besides, someone would be able to list their 5 upcoming courses and as 
soon as one drops off add another to the end.  If you consider admin 
courses alone that's listing a calendar 5 months in advance (potentially).
> our training to you", or "vote here for course X offered in city Y at
I think that might be worse than the situation we have now.. 

chander

---

From: Dave Page <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 15:11:17 +0000

> Or something like that ...

That would require a much more significant redesign of the way we handle 
events which is not something I have time for atm unfortunately. For the 
record, I think we'd want to properly seperate them from the other 
events and allow them to be categorised in one or more categories (a 
single course might cover multiple topics).

/D

---

From: Dave Page <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 15:15:00 +0000

> +1, especially if the number of companies is noticeably more than

Grr - the companies bit was the part that took all the time :-)

The way it is now, it will never name more than three companies, of 
which it will pull the names randomly from the upcoming events.

I think it's useful to keep the companies names there as it will give 
people more of an impression of the range of different training 
providers available. I'll play with the wording and layout later (maybe 
tomorrow) and see if I can address the general concern that it looks too 
'blocky'.

If that doesn't work, I'll back it off to just the count.

/D

---

From: Dave Page <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 15:16:30 +0000

> Sounds good to me.  Can we have a non-US company in there somewhere? 

We could if they scheduled a course in the next six months. The names 
are taken randomly from whoever has something scheduled.

/D

---

From: Bruce Momjian <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 10:21:50 -0500 (EST)

> single course might cover multiple topics).

Personally I never liked having the "more" link show both events and
training because the design suggests that "more" and "submit event" goes
only with training.  The fact we only have one event listed:

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

suggests that people don't realize they can submit events using the link
under Training.  That should be fixed somehow.

FYI, why is the Brazil Postgres conference not listed:

	http://www.postgresql.org.br/

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <[email-masked]>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://postgres.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

---

From: Dave Page <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 15:22:42 +0000

> limit as to their total listings...

The problem is that we don't want to prevent legitimate courses being 
listed. As PostgreSQL grows, and the companies around it grow there will 
inevitably be more and more courses scheduled, especially by the bigger 
multi-national players.

Regards, Dave

---

From: Chander Ganesan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 10:53:47 -0500

Dave Page wrote:
>> and more likely to post events they really plan to run when they have 
>> a limit as to their total listings...
>
> listed. As PostgreSQL grows, and the companies around it grow there 
> will inevitably be more and more courses scheduled, especially by the 
> bigger multi-national players.
>
> Regards, Dave
I understand, however the issue now isn't one of growth...IMHO it's one 
of growth being stymied because we have a list of training events that 
doesn't represent classes *actually* being offered.  Seems like at the 
very least a short term "band aid" solution could be applied while we 
try to figure out a way to adequately and fairly address the issue...  
I'm sure as time goes on we'll come to better understand the needs of 
companies that legitimately offer training courses.

---

From: Chander Ganesan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 10:58:25 -0500

Dave Page wrote:
>> Over the next 6 months, there are <link>21 courses</link> being 
>> offered in 4 countries, split up as:<p>
>> <ul>
>>   <li> 3 - Administration
>>   <li> 2 - Implementation
>>   <li> 9 - Tuning
>> </ul>
>>
> That would require a much more significant redesign of the way we 
> handle events which is not something I have time for atm 
> unfortunately. For the record, I think we'd want to properly seperate 
> them from the other events and allow them to be categorised in one or 
> more categories (a single course might cover multiple topics).
I think perhaps not.  We already have course titles...and vendors 
consistently use the same name for their courses.  We could simply take 
the course names, their counts, and when the most recent of any 
particular group of courses (start date) is.  Then list the three most 
recent (in terms of start date) along with a count as to the number of 
times they are offered...

Like: Upcoming courses:

PostgreSQL Administration (14 events)
PostgreSQL Cool Tricks and Stuff (3 events)
PostgreSQL for Dummies (1 event)
plus 4 Other events...

If you can send me some DDL I can write up a sample query...
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
>               http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 12:06:55 -0400

- --On Sunday, November 04, 2007 10:53:47 -0500 Chander Ganesan 
<[email-masked]> wrote:

> I understand, however the issue now isn't one of growth...IMHO it's one of
> growth being stymied because we have a list of training events that doesn't
> represent classes *actually* being offered.  Seems like at the very least a
> short term "band aid" solution could be applied while we try to figure out a
> way to adequately and fairly address the issue...  I'm sure as time goes on
> we'll come to better understand the needs of companies that legitimately
> offer training courses.

How is this much different then universities / colleges that offer Course 
timeslot X/Y and Z, but cancel slot Z because there wasn't enough enrollment to 
make it worth doign?

- ----

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 08:25:24 -0800

On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 10:53:47 -0500
Chander Ganesan <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Dave Page wrote:
> > Chander Ganesan wrote:
> >> I *still* think (and am apparently still ignored...) there should
> >> be limits placed on the number of events a vendor can
> >> list...either by type, or by vendor.  A vendor is less likely to
> >> post "training spam", and more likely to post events they really
> >> plan to run when they have a limit as to their total listings...
> >
> > The problem is that we don't want to prevent legitimate courses
> > being listed. As PostgreSQL grows, and the companies around it grow
> > there will inevitably be more and more courses scheduled,
> > especially by the bigger multi-national players.
> >
> > Regards, Dave
> I understand, however the issue now isn't one of growth...IMHO it's
> one of growth being stymied because we have a list of training events
> that doesn't represent classes *actually* being offered.

I seriously doubt that postgresql training growth is being stymied by
one obscure link among dozens on a website front page.

Joshua D. Drake

- --

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 08:26:48 -0800

On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 12:06:55 -0400
"Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]> wrote:

> > one of growth being stymied because we have a list of training
> > events that doesn't represent classes *actually* being offered.
> > Seems like at the very least a short term "band aid" solution could
> > be applied while we try to figure out a way to adequately and
> > fairly address the issue...  I'm sure as time goes on we'll come to
> > better understand the needs of companies that legitimately offer
> > training courses.
> 
> How is this much different then universities / colleges that offer
> Course timeslot X/Y and Z, but cancel slot Z because there wasn't
> enough enrollment to make it worth doign?

Colleges do that as a last resort, versus a companies that does it by
design.

Joshua D. Drake

- --

---

From: Chander Ganesan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 11:49:04 -0500

> timeslot X/Y and Z, but cancel slot Z because there wasn't enough enrollment to 
I think the University has the intention of offering the class, they 
also have an established and published rule in regard to the criteria to 
offer the course, they have an instructor that is slated and available 
to teach the class in advance, they have a facility that is "reserved" 
in advance for the event, etc.  I could go on and on....  In our case, 
we've got companies that are using the training list for lead 
generation, to sell PG related services and/or training.  One such 
company in question apparently lists themselves as a consulting company 
that also offers PG training (refer to the PG services page).

If someone goes to the training page, they see 20+ events, all in 
different cities, some of which are "close by" to them..so they give 
them a call.  They then get a market pitch for an on-site course, PG 
consulting services, or "herded" into a different class in a different 
cities, where they try to "pool" sufficient people for a class.  It's a 
common technique in the training industry...

It's no different than, say CMD, listing training events so they can 
gain leads for on-site training or PG services.  They don't do it (and I 
doubt that JD would stoop to that level), but it illustrates the point.

 From my perspective, we offer a quality product...in a competitive 
market, with above-the-board business practices we've been able to 
flourish - as have a number of others (Modern, BNR, EDB, etc).  I'd hate 
to see companies stop offering PG training, or reduce the frequency of 
such courses, because of such practices by others.  As Tom said, he 
recognizes there is a problem...I think most of us do...

chander
> iD8DBQFHLe4n4QvfyHIvDvMRAvMSAKDahUo3RH3woHe0kHBC5ChRifT5OACgjqqa
> xTaBzbkT+EQZ/gOxwa1tzCY=
> =5DSY

---

From: Chander Ganesan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 11:52:40 -0500

> one obscure link among dozens on a website front page.
I think it's stymied by 30+ events in 5+ cities listed on the training 
page by one or more companies that has plans to run maybe 1 of those 
courses, if any.  Check out the training event list... 

I think that the training page should list only events that have a 
moderate chance of running...that's my whole point. 

chander
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFHLfJ3ATb/zqfZUUQRAmUOAKCZLyFpYHzuA9PPEXPKuL/F1w3o0gCgoIiW
> xWDGphGTkAzHpOxH48ekOsY=
> =vlMy
> TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
>        choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
>        match
>

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 09:30:37 -0800

On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 11:49:04 -0500
Chander Ganesan <[email-masked]> wrote:

> gain leads for on-site training or PG services.  They don't do it
> (and I doubt that JD would stoop to that level), but it illustrates
> the point.

Just to be clear :).. There is no reason to doubt. I would never do
such as thing and I would fire my marketing department (if I had one)
should they ever do such a thing.

Joshua D. Drake

- --

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 09:39:21 -0800

On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 11:52:40 -0500
Chander Ganesan <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >
> > I seriously doubt that postgresql training growth is being stymied
> > by one obscure link among dozens on a website front page.
> >   
> I think it's stymied by 30+ events in 5+ cities listed on the
> training page by one or more companies that has plans to run maybe 1
> of those courses, if any.  Check out the training event list... 

Of the first 14 training events, 3 are from unknowns (including
certfirst).

Are we making more out of this than we should be?

However I do see a flood of entries later from Certfirst. Not to be an
ass, but this problem goes away for the forseeable future if we just
ban Certfirst from posting training events. There is no way they are
running all those classes.

/me puts FG hat on.

Perhaps as 50.00 donation should be required for each training listing.

Joshua D. Drake

- --

---

From: Chander Ganesan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 12:53:00 -0500

> Perhaps as 50.00 donation should be required for each training listing.
Me, puts of community supporter hat....we donate either way ;-)  
However, I think that $50 isn't much of a deterrent.  I think if you 
want it to be a deterrent to event spam, put that number a bit higher.   
That was my idea with the "first X are free for 1 calendar year, the 
rest are $1k apiece" or something like that.

Chander
> iD8DBQFHLgPJATb/zqfZUUQRArxjAJ4h3WzCdRJOMhThqIJnKhGhRtAGFACdEAWu
> 2ctc/73Se6oroaq6pkPm9HY=
> =uuYZ

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 10:00:21 -0800

On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 12:53:00 -0500

> However, I think that $50 isn't much of a deterrent.  I think if you 

50 * 1 isn't much of a deterrent.
50 * 12 could be. 

Especially since it would be non refundable and the listing time is
short, but it isn't so much the dollar amount (I left it low on
purpose). It is the fact they must donate.

Most unsavory companies I know are also cheap bastards and won't spend
a nickel if they don't have to. I strongly doubt that we are generating
enough leads for certfirst for them to go through the requisition
process for the donations.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

- --

---

From: Chander Ganesan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 13:13:53 -0500

> 50 * 1 isn't much of a deterrent.
I disagree.  Consider that if they sell a class for $2200 apiece, 600 is 
a pittance...it's less than the profit of 1 student, and if you consider 
that listing a class 12 times brings them, say 2 students (probably 
more, but I'm being ultra-conservative here), it's still worth the cost.

Consider that we post a limited number of classes and make regular 
donations that are much larger than $600 (note: we offer air, hotel, and 
training for that price...so our margins are considerably smaller).
> process for the donations.
I think you'd be surprised...companies do something similar with Novell, 
and have to pay Novell something like $1000/year/location listed (they 
can then list an unlimited number of classes at the location) but still 
find it worthwhile, IMHO Novell's training locater is virtually useless, 
the number of courses listed is an order of magnitude greater than the 
number that actually run...  A single lead that turned into an on-site 
course would more than pay for a good 100+ listings...

Besides, if a company is running that many courses, then they can 
definitely afford to pony up a bit more change...especially here in the 
US.  I would propose some kind of sliding scale based on the country 
perhaps...we don't want to price Dextra out of a market....or any other 
company that does business in a weaker currency (though the way things 
are going there might not be that many...).
> iD8DBQFHLgi6ATb/zqfZUUQRAr5NAJ90DsTVKDf6FAAQ5Os3H8FXqeaJMACeL6WQ
> dpd0WyEc93CC6nYSwd/nCaE=
> =CZ/m

---

From: Dave Page <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 22:28:35 +0000

> If you can send me some DDL I can write up a sample query...

Well thats not exactly the same as was originally suggested, and in fact
does little more than to force events to be grouped by what could easily
be minor differences in phrasing:

PostgreSQL Administration for Beginners (3 events)
PostgreSQL Administration 101 (5 events)
Getting started with PostgreSQL (2 events)
Beginning PostgreSQL (4 events).

If we want to do something like that it needs to be done properly by
(for example) pre-defining some set categories to ensure we list things
appropriately.

Regards, Dave.

---

From: Chander Ganesan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 18:59:31 -0500

> (for example) pre-defining some set categories to ensure we list things
We could fund the change...OTG is willing to foot the bill (assuming we 
get an estimate of cost in advance) , or make a sizable SPI contribution 
(say $1000?) .  I agree this is the best way to go...

I think the community gets the most bang for the buck when they can see 
the breadth of courses offered, rather than sheer numbers.

---

From: Chander Ganesan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 20:24:56 -0500

Chander Ganesan wrote:
> We could fund the change...OTG is willing to foot the bill (assuming 
> we get an estimate of cost in advance) , or make a sizable SPI 
> contribution (say $1000?) .  I agree this is the best way to go...
>
> I think the community gets the most bang for the buck when they can 
> see the breadth of courses offered, rather than sheer numbers.
>
I guess I need to be straight up about this...we're making the SPI 
contribution either way, but it'd be cool to have it done :-)

---

From: Josh Berkus <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2007 14:25:53 +0800

Dave,

> are taken randomly from whoever has something scheduled.

OK, perfect then.  Can we go with your solution?  I think it's a great 
compromise.

--Josh

---

From: Dave Page <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2007 08:45:12 +0000

> (say $1000?) .  I agree this is the best way to go...

That won't fix my own lack of time, but someone might be interested in
taking a look.

/D

---

From: Dave Page <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2007 10:04:21 +0000

> tomorrow) and see if I can address the general concern that it looks too

I've changed the following:

- It lists at most 2 company names, picked at random from those with
outstanding events.

- The font is a touch smaller.

- There is a paragraph break between the summary text and the 'click
here to see the full schedule' text.

http://dave.pgadmin.org/

Look better?

/D

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 08:25:40 -0800

On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 10:04:21 +0000

> here to see the full schedule' text.

Yes. Good job!

Joshua D. Drake

- --

---

From: Josh Berkus <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2007 22:56:50 +0900

Dave,

+1!

Can we get it up ASAP?  I'm getting harassed by some of the training 
providers ...

Also, I'll note that at this point almost all of the training providers 
are also financial donors (although at rather different levels).  The 
only exceptions are Big Nerd Ranch (and I'd be willing to give them a 
pass based on early support) and dbExperts (whom we might bounce as 
general parasites, unless they've patched things up with PostgreSQL.Br 
sometime recently).

--Josh Berkus

---

From: Dave Page <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2007 15:29:23 +0000

> Can we get it up ASAP?  I'm getting harassed by some of the training 

Done.

Regards, Dave