Обсуждение: Request from training vendor re: home page
WWW, You may or may not have noticed that we're getting a bit of jockeying for home page spots among our training vendors. It's obviously not in our interest to have different vendors manipulating the details of their events announcements, or even posting duplicates, in order to "control" what appears on the home page. One of the vendors involved had this suggestion: > Just a thought...I notice that now "training" is split out separately on > the PostgreSQL.org web site...which is great in the sense that > non-training events don't get pushed off the front page by training > events (or event spam...). > > I'm wondering if its possible to "somewhat equalize" things by > preventing a single vendor event from appearing more than once on the > front page. The idea being that training vendors (which are generally > for-profit) would get equal opportunity for that ever-important > front-page exposure... Seems like a decent idea; does it make sense to other people? How would we enforce it? -- --Josh Josh Berkus PostgreSQL @ Sun San Francisco
Josh Berkus wrote: > WWW, > > You may or may not have noticed that we're getting a bit of jockeying for > home page spots among our training vendors. It's obviously not in our > interest to have different vendors manipulating the details of their > events announcements, or even posting duplicates, in order to "control" > what appears on the home page. One of the vendors involved had this > suggestion: > >> Just a thought...I notice that now "training" is split out separately on >> the PostgreSQL.org web site...which is great in the sense that >> non-training events don't get pushed off the front page by training >> events (or event spam...). >> >> I'm wondering if its possible to "somewhat equalize" things by >> preventing a single vendor event from appearing more than once on the >> front page. The idea being that training vendors (which are generally >> for-profit) would get equal opportunity for that ever-important >> front-page exposure... > > Seems like a decent idea; does it make sense to other people? How would we > enforce it? > Well, they're ordered by date. So if two vendors have a similar number of offerings, they should show up the same amount of time. As for duplicates, the person approving the event is *supposed* to look for that. Now, I realise we're all probably guilty of not always doing that, but... Not sure how we'd filter it otherwise, but I'm open for ideas :-) //Magnus
On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 09:24:21PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > Well, they're ordered by date. So if two vendors have a similar number > of offerings, they should show up the same amount of time. As for > duplicates, the person approving the event is *supposed* to look for > that. Now, I realise we're all probably guilty of not always doing that, > but... Rather than ordering strictly by date, what about ordering by rand(two week period) or something? A -- Andrew Sullivan | ajs@crankycanuck.ca The fact that technology doesn't work is no bar to success in the marketplace. --Philip Greenspun
Magnus, > Well, they're ordered by date. So if two vendors have a similar number > of offerings, they should show up the same amount of time. As for > duplicates, the person approving the event is *supposed* to look for > that. Now, I realise we're all probably guilty of not always doing that, > but... Well, to be blunt about it some training vendors are scheduling training events rather optimistically in order to capture front page spots by having a training 3x per month. This unfairly bumps other providers who are not so prolific in their submissions. -- --Josh Josh Berkus PostgreSQL @ Sun San Francisco