On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 00:55 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > I'm disappointed that you asked for opinions and then when you didn't
> > like them, asked for them again.
>
> How many times do I need to repeat this? I got several people who
> approved, and several specific objections to specific things in the
> survey. I changed the survey to address those objections, and asked if
> there were still problems. *just* like I would with a piece of code.
You asked for an opinion, received negative counter opinions. I proposed
an alternative and received positive support. You haven't changed things
in line with those posts.
I have one specific objection only: we, the PostgreSQL project, should
be doing this in the name of the project, not let another do it. I
believe that others agreed with that.
> > The subsequent name calling is a great way
> > to have nobody else join the debate on either side.
>
> What name calling?
> > As Rob says, if you don't have clear standards about what is and is not
> > acceptable then it will, possibly has, eroded away to nothing. Nobody
> > has the time for strong and lengthy debates on minor points. But where
> > do we draw the line? We just continually step backwards in small enough
> > steps that no single step is worthy of debate.
>
> When did doing a survey become a moral point? It's a survey. Don't
> make it more than it is.
This is just verbal dancing. The survey would never be a moral point.
The point of the discussion was about community standards with regard to
marketing. It's not a question of morals and I do not claim to be
authority on morality.
What are our standards? Do we have any? Would we stick to them if we had
any?
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
