Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: planet "top posters" section

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: "Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum" <adsmail(at)wars-nicht(dot)de>, pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: planet "top posters" section
Date: 2010-04-13 20:48:44
Message-ID: q2y603c8f071004131348oaa64bcafoeaafaefb9f51b212@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-www
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 4:29 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
>> That would be reasonable too, although it's a little hard to think
>> about how to apply that to the team section, since the individuals are
>> listed under the teams.  Clearly you could also omit teams with 2 or
>> fewer postings, but what if the team has >2 but some - or all -
>> individuals within the team have <=2?
>
> Well, that's an incentive to join a team.

Hmm.  Well, by that theory, Bruce should quite his job: he'd go from
somewhere buried down in the weeds to the number one spot on the list.

It's clearly not our policy to give people who are on a team a more
prominent position.  More like the reverse.  Personally I think I'd
favor just listing the top 6-10 posters (regardless of whether they're
on a team) and the top 6-10 teams (without listing the posters) and
call it good.

...Robert

In response to

Responses

pgsql-www by date

Next:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2010-04-13 22:08:47
Subject: Re: planet "top posters" section
Previous:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2010-04-13 20:29:18
Subject: Re: planet "top posters" section

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group