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

Re: Training events policy ... first test case

From: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>
To: pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Training events policy ... first test case
Date: 2007-10-23 21:01:37
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-www
On Tuesday 23 October 2007 14:59, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 11:58:28 -0700
> Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> > Folks,
> >
> > Everyone on this list who spoke up approved of the "No more than one
> > training event per company per month" policy for training events.
> > The purpose of this policy is to prevent training companies from
> > messing with our events listings in order to grab the "top 3 spots"
> > from the home page.
> >
> > EnterpriseDB has just submitted 3 trainings for November and 2 for
> > December. While I believe that EDB actually plans on holding all of
> > these trainings, it is the kind of flooding of the training listings
> > that we're trying to prevent.
> >
> > How should we suggest they revise the training listings?
> Have them submit a single event that states:
> Training events from November thru December

That seems to suck in a number of ways; penalizes companies who offer more 
diverse training schedules, penalizes users looking for training in specific 
locales.  The classes between november and december have a month interval, if 
no other classes are taking place during that time, I think it is ok that 
thier listings show up, so for me this is not an issue.  Now, looking at each 
month individually, if we approve all 3 november events, currently that would 
knock out the modern course untill the 8th, which kind of sucks too.  The tie 
breaker for me is that it seems what is really important to someone looking 
for training is the date and location, so that two classes on different 
continents should not be penalized because they are put on by the same 
company (this thinking is re-enforced in that we dont show company names on 
the main page).  Also, given enough companies and bad scheduling luck, you 
can always get bumped off the main page, so I think we should approve them 

Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL

In response to


pgsql-www by date

Next:From: Robert TreatDate: 2007-10-23 21:02:42
Subject: Re: Problem with survey code
Previous:From: Robert TreatDate: 2007-10-23 20:35:32
Subject: Re: is down

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group