Re: 9442-92C3-C7E6 : CONSULT from pgsql-announce (post)

On 8/2/10 3:00 PM, David Fetter wrote:
> Until now, putting up something irrelevant has been plenty of reason
> to reject any individual submission for the web site, and
> too-often-repeated submissions, even when 100% relevant, have been
> enough to get someone banned. I can name at least one recent company
> name if you insist.

It's all a matter of degree. The company we banned was not a supporter
of the project, was posting unacceptable content to our site several
times a week, and was not working on improving ... instead they were
*arguing* that we were wrong to censor them. And *did* have allegations
of fraud, even though those were unproven. And, in fact, when they
eventually mended their behavior we allowed them to post again, although
they seem to have gone out of business in the meantime.

Continuent, on the other hand, is a supporter of PostgreSQL.org with
both time and money, has only a few off-topic posts, and has been
profusely apologetic about their lack of list control. I, for one,
value their contributions to the PostgreSQL community above their spam
issues.

As was earlier today pointed out to me about *individual* contributors,
should always be very cautious and hesitant to censure any contributor
who makes a mistake.

--
-- Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://www.pgexperts.com