Re: Company PR WAS: News links, post 'em here - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy
| From | Chris Travers |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: Company PR WAS: News links, post 'em here |
| Date | |
| Msg-id | CAKt_ZfvFhOVi5dwkY55Z8ya503aknYWKOjxx3a106M2N6kpJwA@mail.gmail.com Whole thread Raw |
| In response to | Re: Company PR WAS: News links, post 'em here (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
| List | pgsql-advocacy |
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
On 09/13/2013 06:49 AM, Chris Travers wrote:
> For example, I have started contacting journalists who only mention a
> single company for support and suggesting that it is worth noting that many
> companies offer very good support, and providing a list of a few.
That's a good approach. Keep in mind that reporters who, for example,
only talk about EnterpriseDB, are probably unaware that there are
multiple postgresql-supporting companies. Our "round table" approach
for our project is not the standard (event though it should be).
> Not discussing the French here, but here in SE Asia I have seen what
> happens when one company dominates the discussion about PostgreSQL and I
> don't think it is good for our community long run. This is to some extent
> inevitable in many parts of the world since the PostgreSQL community is
> nothing if not stealthy. However it introduces some inevitable imbalances
> in the discussion
On the other hand, it's better than not having PostgreSQL promoted in
that country at all, which may be our other option in many of the
countries with smaller tech sectors.
For sure. Note that I wasn't saying that companies should stop doing it. Otherwise we'd have a worse problem (namely nobody could move first and so nobody could move). It was just a caution, one dovetailing with my suggestion that hijacking was good as long as one to coordinating with others who might want to hijack too.
My perspective is that more voices here are always better.
> I think it is worth acknowledging that this can and will happen and that
> those of us who are regional contacts have some responsibility to ensure an
> open flow of contributions into the press process.
Yes, and that's part of the guidelines for RCs, and we've had pretty
good adherence to it, as far as I know. Note that JPA is NOT the RC.
JD Wrote:
> Yes but the comparison that JoshB brought up was not a PostgreSQL
> Company. It was just a company that uses PostgreSQL. A very different
> thing.
I don't know that that's much of a distinction. Free PR is free PR.
I think there is a distinction between seller and customer in that way, but that the distinction makes them complementary. One is a customer testimonial. The other is a vendor perspective. I think this gets a little weird with PostgreSQL because of our round table approach so we have a press release that represents a sort of artificially standardized generic vendor viewpoint but this exists in a context where we have many vendors and many customers. So I think they both add something, just very different things.
Again, I think more voices are almost always better.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
Best Wishes,
Chris Travers
Efficito: Hosted Accounting and ERP. Robust and Flexible. No vendor lock-in.
pgsql-advocacy by date: