MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20120130042538.GA24817@momjian.us>
References: 
 <CA+OCxow3T9g-Cpt+B437vgCoYL+y83+LCYVw8Z42SnW3ciUB1g@mail.gmail.com>
	<20120130042538.GA24817@momjian.us>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 07:55:10 +0000
Message-ID: 
 <CA+OCxoyL4eDez+azCJDCxNr_FxrR1zwupc-avKK4X8CUp7KV9A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Planet posting policy
From: Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: PostgreSQL WWW <pgsql-www@postgresql.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 4:25 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 10:59:29AM +0000, Dave Page wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> We currently have a strict posting policy for planet.postgresql.org
>> (http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Planet_PostgreSQL), which has been
>> applied in such a way that it prevents users posting anything to their
>> syndicated blogs which may be remotely considered to be advertising.
>> This has tripped up a number of our regular contributors in the past,
>> including some senior community members who have posted technical
>> content about their work which happens to be on commercial products
>> around PostgreSQL.
>>
>> I'd like to propose relaxing this policy (or perhaps the
>> interpretation of it) to allow useful content to be posted that
>> happens to be centered around commercial products, whilst being
>> careful to avoid pure advertising content which we certainly do not
>> want (and should continue to be posted as news or pgsql-announce
>> articles).
>
> While I am not against relaxing the rules, it would be a shame if the
> new rules were more vague than the old ones. =A0The old rules, while
> strict, were very easy to mentally filter; =A0I am worried more vague
> rules will lead to more uncertainty and perhaps arguments/hurt feelings.

To some extent I think that's unavoidable. The current rules are
interpreted pretty strictly and state that unless there is "useful
PostgreSQL content" when product names have been removed, it will not
be allowed. The issue I have with that is that it precludes
*interesting* posts which may describe new products based on use of
PostgreSQL in innovative or unusual ways. That's happened a couple of
times in the past.

--=20
Dave Page
Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake

EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company