Message-ID: <50EF46C0.7060204@agliodbs.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 14:54:56 -0800
From: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Organization: PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
	rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Gabriele Bartolini <gabriele.bartolini@2ndQuadrant.it>
CC: damien clochard <damien@dalibo.info>,
	Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>,
	PostgreSQL WWW <pgsql-www@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Training approval policy on pg.org
References: <50EEA591.3030905@dalibo.info>
 <50EEFA1C.4030508@commandprompt.com>
	<50EEFE57.2010505@agliodbs.com>
	<CABUevEw=bh_NNXy-SNo4WYW=c3nnXA0B2DEKQrSde8uGnn4bJQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<50EF26BD.60209@dalibo.info> <50EF3A9E.2030504@2ndQuadrant.it>
In-Reply-To: <50EF3A9E.2030504@2ndQuadrant.it>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-www-owner@postgresql.org


> My point of view is that, as things stand currently, this is a false
> problem. Publishing of training events (contrary to what happens with
> conferences/community events) does not harm anyone if the publisher is a
> company that is considered to be reliable. Nobody gets bombed with
> emails or spam, the training events simply sit there, in a separate page.

It's not a false problem.  That policy was created in specific response
to a specific problem from a company which (as far as I know) still
exists and will return to abusing our system if we let them.

We probably want a new policy, but it needs to be one which does not
allow casual abuse.


-- 
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com


-- 
Sent via pgsql-www mailing list (pgsql-www@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-www