On 9/29/2007 7:22 PM, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
>
> - --On Saturday, September 29, 2007 17:47:21 -0400 Jan Wieck
> <JanWieck@Yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>> I just want to know where the majority stands on Postgre. Because if the
>> majority says we should not accept it, then I can add some code to the IRC
>> bot to jump down the throat of ... er ... let me rephrase that ... politely
>> point out that Postgre is NOT an accepted name of the project, whenever
>> someone new to the channel is asking a Postgre related question. And it would
>> also ask for everyone to correct it wherever there is a chance (I do admit
>> that during the first meeting with a new customer isn't really a good chance).
>>
>> But if instead, the majority thinks we should gallantly overlook the use of
>> Postgre and act as if the person had accidentally made a typing error meaning
>> Postgres indeed, we defacto do accept Postgre and should document it that way.
>>
>> Can't have it both ways.
>
> If we want 'rude and ignorant that might push ppl away', go with the former ...
> myself, I'm in the latter group ...
Just because you cannot imagine that correcting someone can be done in a
polite way doesn't mean that insisting on Postgre not being an accepted
alias is necessarily rude and ignorant by definition.
Jan
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #
