Re: Quality of email postings

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Quality of email postings
Date: 2007-08-10 05:14:15
Message-ID: 200708100514.l7A5EFK02407@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > I am getting concerned about the quality of email traffic on the
> > advocacy list. It seems postings are often not fully formed ideas and
> > that threads frequently go on and on with few conclusions. I am
> > thinking there has to be more leadership in keeping threads on track,
> > and more focus in emails.
> >
> > Why does this matter? I have been approached by two sales people in the
> > past few days who are subscribed to advocacy and want to help
> > PostgreSQL, but they are wondering if the advocacy list is a useful
> > place for them to help. If we don't add focus to the discussions, we
> > risk losing their involvement in advocating PostgreSQL.
> >
> > FYI, I don't see anywhere near the same kind of unfocused discussion on
> > the other PostgreSQL email lists.
>
> What are you actually proposing?

I am suggesting that more people need to get involved directing the
discussion, summarizing previous postings, keeping the discussion on
topic, and moving it toward a conclusion.

This happens pretty effectively on the other PostgreSQL lists.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2007-08-10 05:25:05 Re: Quality of email postings
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2007-08-10 01:16:38 Re: Quality of email postings