Re: Quality of email postings

You're kidding right?

This is a list for discussing advocacy, and should be open to the
whole community who is interested, just as it has been.

I think this list would ultimately be less volatile if EDB stopped
making claims that pisses off members of the community not directly
related to EDB.

I appreciate EDB's contributions and efforts, but bite my tongue in
joining in on the long threads because it's not productive to do so.

Attempting to close off this list will ultimately fracture our
community, this is not an announcement list. This is a list for
members to discuss advocacy, promotion and related issues. Just
because EDB is catching heat for its poor choice in marketing terms
doesn't mean that this list should be closed.

I respect Bruce, EDB and all the other parties who participate here,
but this thread and direction flies in the face of all the efforts and
accomplishments that have happened because of this list and the nature
of the list.

Regards,

Gavin

On 8/10/07, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
> "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
>
> > 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.
>
> I propose that we restrict advocacy to be writable by only the www team.
> Everyone else can send their suggested posts to them and they can edit them
> and post them. That way the discussions will represent only a professional
> appearance and we can avoid having porn posted on the advocacy mailing list.
>
> --
> Gregory Stark
> EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
>