On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 07:50:20AM +0000, Dave Page wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 5:21 AM, Peter Geoghegan <peter@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> > On 29 January 2012 18:42, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
> >> I was trying to find a way to allow posts that aren't purely technical
> >> in nature. For example, if a company started a new website that
> >> happened to have 10TB of geo data stored in Postgres, I'd want to hear
> >> about it as a good example of Postgres being used in "state of the
> >> art" ways, even if it wasn't necessarily a post about how they did it
> >> in technical detail.
> >
> > Are you sure that that wouldn't be allowed under our current policy?
> > I'd have thought that was fine, provided that it was actually useful.
>
> It might have been under the policy itself, however we've been
> interpreting that based on the guidance notes which are pretty strict,
> and essentially only allow posts of a purely technical nature.
I think the real risk we have in relaxing the rules is that postings
will be made who's _intent_ is to highlight a commercial product. Once
the indent is commercial promotion, the blog itself isn't very
interesting to others.
We have succussfully blocked such postings --- the big question is
whether we can allow postings based on commercial products without
having postings that are "intended" to be promotional.
I think Dave or Josh mention the pitfall tangentially --- if someone's
intent is promotional, they might blog about how to do X with some
commercial product, then, next week, show how to do Y with some
commercial product. Imagine them thinking, "Oh, I haven't blogged about
my commercial product in a while, and the Postgres blog is very popular,
let me think of how to do that again."
I am not saying that will happen, but it might happen if we aren't as
clear as we are now in the guidelines. And if our rules are not as
clear as they are now, we then have to guess what their intent was, and
pick apart the blog post to get facts to support our interpretation.
I think everyone kind of agrees our rules are too tight, but it is
unclear how to relax them _clearly_.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +