Thread: Event Spam..???
Hello,<br /><br /> I just noticed the following events posted:<br /><br /><a class="listtitle" href="http://www.postgresql.org/about/event.497">Unknown</a><br/> Date: <b>2007-09-22 – 2008-12-04</b> Location: <b>Unknown,Unknown, Dominican Republic</b><br /> Posted by <b><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:britneycoros@spears.com">britneycoros@spears.com</a></b><br/><div class="listsummary"><a href="http://jabiki.hotbox.ru">acamp band</a> <a href="http://pebiju.hotbox.ru">aagps</a> <a href="http://pezoji.hotbox.ru">aslut wife</a> <a href="http://lepini.hotbox.ru">a midsummers night dream quotes</a> <a href="http://ketaby.hotbox.ru">afamily</a> <a href="http://www.postgresql.org/about/event.497">more...</a></div><br /><aclass="listtitle" href="http://www.postgresql.org/about/event.498">Unknown</a><br /> Date: <b>2008-03-17 – 2009-08-29</b>Location: <b>Unknown, Unknown, Montserrat</b><br /> Posted by <b><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:britneyypvga@spears.com">britneyypvga@spears.com</a></b><br/><div class="listsummary"><a href="http://myxifa.front.ru">asecurity problem occurred</a> <a href="http://tesezi.front.ru">a+ questions free</a> <a href="http://geqysa.front.ru">aantalinwoners amsterdam</a> <a href="http://nykeli.front.ru">a7 envelope template</a> <a href="http://comege.front.ru">ajob title</a> <a href="http://www.postgresql.org/about/event.498">more...</a><br /><br />I'm assuming they aren't there intentionally...<br /><br /> Also, I notice a lot of events in the training database thatseem to be dedicated more to "lead generation" than a reasonable effort to run a training course. For example, 'Certfirst'lists PostgreSQL courses throughout the US in a wide range of different cities. It is my belief that these courseslistings are designed not to actually offer a wide range of courses, but to maintain a "main page" list of coursesto generate leads. Is this an acceptable practice? I'd hate to see a bunch of vendors adopting this practice tobe competitive....<br /><br /> It seems to me that such a practice would not be to the benefit of the community - sinceit wouldn't help community members find events that were actually running - rather it would put them in touch with companiesthat could add them to their marketing databases (or they'd get taken with a "bait and switch" - where they signup for a class in the Bahamas, but end up being redirected to a course in Chicago).<br /><br /> Also, how about puttinga disclaimer on the training pages indicating that the listing of training courses doesn't constitute the endorsementof a company by the PG community - and that customers should do their own due diligence to ensure they get whatthey pay for. I think many customers look at a listing of training and consider it to be an endorsement by the community..<br/><br /> Thanks<br /></div><pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- Chander Ganesan The Open Technology Group One Copley Parkway, Suite 210 Morrisville, NC 27560 Phone: 877-258-8987/919-463-0999 <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.otg-nc.com">http://www.otg-nc.com</a> </pre>
Chander Ganesan wrote: > Hello, > > I just noticed the following events posted: > > Unknown <http://www.postgresql.org/about/event.497> <snip> Err, how did you see these? They haven't been approved for publishing. Regards, Dave
Dave Page wrote: <blockquote cite="mid:46449305.5080405@postgresql.org" type="cite"><pre wrap="">Chander Ganesan wrote:</pre><blockquote type="cite"><pre wrap="">Hello, I just noticed the following events posted: Unknown <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://www.postgresql.org/about/event.497"><http://www.postgresql.org/about/event.497></a> </pre></blockquote><prewrap=""> <snip> Err, how did you see these? They haven't been approved for publishing. Regards, Dave </pre></blockquote><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.postgresql.org/about/eventarchive">http://www.postgresql.org/about/eventarchive</a><br/><br /><pre class="moz-signature"cols="72">-- Chander Ganesan The Open Technology Group One Copley Parkway, Suite 210 Morrisville, NC 27560 Phone: 877-258-8987/919-463-0999 <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.otg-nc.com">http://www.otg-nc.com</a> </pre>
Chander Ganesan wrote: > Dave Page wrote: >> Chander Ganesan wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I just noticed the following events posted: >>> >>> Unknown <http://www.postgresql.org/about/event.497> >>> >> >> <snip> >> >> Err, how did you see these? They haven't been approved for publishing. >> >> Regards, Dave >> > http://www.postgresql.org/about/eventarchive > Ooops, thanks fixed. Regards, Dave.
Dave Page wrote: <blockquote cite="mid:46449BE3.6010408@postgresql.org" type="cite"><pre wrap="">Chander Ganesan wrote:</pre><blockquote type="cite"><pre wrap="">Dave Page wrote: </pre><blockquote type="cite"><pre wrap="">Chander Ganesanwrote: </pre><blockquote type="cite"><pre wrap="">Hello, I just noticed the following events posted: Unknown <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://www.postgresql.org/about/event.497"><http://www.postgresql.org/about/event.497></a> </pre></blockquote><prewrap=""><snip> Err, how did you see these? They haven't been approved for publishing. Regards, Dave </pre></blockquote><pre wrap=""><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.postgresql.org/about/eventarchive">http://www.postgresql.org/about/eventarchive</a> </pre></blockquote><pre wrap=""> Ooops, thanks fixed. Regards, Dave. </pre></blockquote><br /> Cool. Any word on the latter part of my email? ;-) <br /><br /> thanks<br /><br/> chander<br /><br /><br /><pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- Chander Ganesan The Open Technology Group One Copley Parkway, Suite 210 Morrisville, NC 27560 Phone: 877-258-8987/919-463-0999 <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.otg-nc.com">http://www.otg-nc.com</a> </pre>
> Also, how about putting a disclaimer on the training pages indicating
> that the listing of training courses doesn't constitute the endorsement
> of a company by the PG community - and that customers should do their
> own due diligence to ensure they get what they pay for. I think many
> customers look at a listing of training and consider it to be an
> endorsement by the community..
We would have to do it on the:
news page
consultants page
hosting page
contributors page
I understand and appreciate the point, but I think it would cause a
reverse effect that may not be positive.
Joshua D. Drake
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
Chander Ganesan wrote: > Also, I notice a lot of events in the training database that seem to be > dedicated more to "lead generation" than a reasonable effort to run a > training course. For example, 'Certfirst' lists PostgreSQL courses > throughout the US in a wide range of different cities. It is my belief > that these courses listings are designed not to actually offer a wide > range of courses, but to maintain a "main page" list of courses to > generate leads. Is this an acceptable practice? I'd hate to see a > bunch of vendors adopting this practice to be competitive.... > > It seems to me that such a practice would not be to the benefit of the > community - since it wouldn't help community members find events that > were actually running - rather it would put them in touch with companies > that could add them to their marketing databases (or they'd get taken > with a "bait and switch" - where they sign up for a class in the > Bahamas, but end up being redirected to a course in Chicago). I agree it's not good if that is what they are doing, but do you have any proof? How would we distinguish between that, and say a dozen courses put on by EnterpriseDB, Command Prompt or OTG? > Also, how about putting a disclaimer on the training pages indicating > that the listing of training courses doesn't constitute the endorsement > of a company by the PG community - and that customers should do their > own due diligence to ensure they get what they pay for. I think many > customers look at a listing of training and consider it to be an > endorsement by the community.. I haven't gone quite that far, but following a discussion with Magnus I have added a line saying that PGDG doesn't endorse any third part events. Thanks, Dave.
Dave Page wrote: <blockquote cite="mid:4644A423.6030406@postgresql.org" type="cite"><pre wrap="">Chander Ganesan wrote:</pre><blockquote type="cite"><pre wrap="">Also, I notice a lot of events in the training database that seem to be dedicated more to "lead generation" than a reasonable effort to run a training course. For example, 'Certfirst' lists PostgreSQL courses throughout the US in a wide range of different cities. It is my belief that these courses listings are designed not to actually offer a wide range of courses, but to maintain a "main page" list of courses to generate leads. Is this an acceptable practice? I'd hate to see a bunch of vendors adopting this practice to be competitive.... It seems to me that such a practice would not be to the benefit of the community - since it wouldn't help community members find events that were actually running - rather it would put them in touch with companies that could add them to their marketing databases (or they'd get taken with a "bait and switch" - where they sign up for a class in the Bahamas, but end up being redirected to a course in Chicago). </pre></blockquote><pre wrap=""> I agree it's not good if that is what they are doing, but do you have any proof? How would we distinguish between that, and say a dozen courses put on by EnterpriseDB, Command Prompt or OTG? </pre></blockquote> I see your point. However, perhaps there is someother mechanism or restriction that can be put in place to limit the likelihood of this (one course of one type per month,a limitation on annual courses listed, or a "per listing" fee charged to not-for-free companies)? Such restrictionswould at least limit abuse to some extent.. Or perhaps limiting listed courses to states where companies areregistered as corporations... Such information is freely available, and it could be required that companies providea link to their articles of incorporation in the states where they provide training - easy to check without unduework on those that filter events... <br /><br /> If others (ourselves included) are forced to take the same actionto be competitive then it results in a reduction in the usefulness of the tool. One could argue that removing it entirelyto prevent abuse would be less disruptive than having PG related companies flounder due to the actions of a few "badcitizens".<br /><blockquote cite="mid:4644A423.6030406@postgresql.org" type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><pre wrap="">Also,how about putting a disclaimer on the training pages indicating that the listing of training courses doesn't constitute the endorsement of a company by the PG community - and that customers should do their own due diligence to ensure they get what they pay for. I think many customers look at a listing of training and consider it to be an endorsement by the community.. </pre></blockquote><pre wrap=""> I haven't gone quite that far, but following a discussion with Magnus I have added a line saying that PGDG doesn't endorse any third part events. Thanks, Dave. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster </pre></blockquote><br /><br /><pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- Chander Ganesan The Open Technology Group One Copley Parkway, Suite 210 Morrisville, NC 27560 Phone: 877-258-8987/919-463-0999 <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.otg-nc.com">http://www.otg-nc.com</a> </pre>
Chander Ganesan wrote: > I see your point. However, perhaps there is some other mechanism or > restriction that can be put in place to limit the likelihood of this > (one course of one type per month, a limitation on annual courses > listed, or a "per listing" fee charged to not-for-free companies)? Such > restrictions would at least limit abuse to some extent.. Or perhaps > limiting listed courses to states where companies are registered as > corporations... Such information is freely available, and it could be > required that companies provide a link to their articles of > incorporation in the states where they provide training - easy to check > without undue work on those that filter events... Limiting the number of listings is not in our interests - we want to show how much PostgreSQL is being used. Perhaps more importantly, how *widely*. We'd want to list courses running in every state, even if they were all the same company. Charging would almost certainly cause us problems given our financial status. I suspect we could 'solicit donations', but that would obviously not have the desired effect. Limiting to the states in which companies are registered is a nonsense as well - what about a company in Japan? How do we check them? Or what about EnterpriseDB UK Ltd for example who cover the whole EMEA region - would they (== we in case you didn't realise I work for them) be restricted to listing courses in England because that's where we're registered? Don't misunderstand - I'm not trying to dodge the issue. I just don't think there's a straightforward solution :-( > If others (ourselves included) are forced to take the same action to be > competitive then it results in a reduction in the usefulness of the > tool. One could argue that removing it entirely to prevent abuse would > be less disruptive than having PG related companies flounder due to the > actions of a few "bad citizens". Let's remember that there are no proven 'bad citizens'. Unless that should change, for you to 'take the same action' would mean scheduling more legitimate courses - which I'd welcome :-) Regards, Dave.
>> limiting listed courses to states where companies are registered as
>> corporations... Such information is freely available, and it could be
>> required that companies provide a link to their articles of
>> incorporation in the states where they provide training - easy to check
>> without undue work on those that filter events...
>
> Limiting the number of listings is not in our interests - we want to
It is, if the listings are not legitimate.
> show how much PostgreSQL is being used. Perhaps more importantly, how
> *widely*. We'd want to list courses running in every state, even if they
> were all the same company.
>
> Charging would almost certainly cause us problems given our financial
> status. I suspect we could 'solicit donations', but that would obviously
> not have the desired effect.
No it wouldn't because the larger the donation the higher up the page
the person would expect to be.
>
> Limiting to the states in which companies are registered is a nonsense
> as well - what about a company in Japan? How do we check them? Or what
> about EnterpriseDB UK Ltd for example who cover the whole EMEA region -
> would they (== we in case you didn't realise I work for them) be
> restricted to listing courses in England because that's where we're
> registered?
>
Perhaps a requirement that a link to the actual registration page for
the class? Listing the details of where the class is etc...
>> If others (ourselves included) are forced to take the same action to be
>> competitive then it results in a reduction in the usefulness of the
>> tool. One could argue that removing it entirely to prevent abuse would
>> be less disruptive than having PG related companies flounder due to the
>> actions of a few "bad citizens".
Agreed.
>
> Let's remember that there are no proven 'bad citizens'. Unless that
> should change, for you to 'take the same action' would mean scheduling
> more legitimate courses - which I'd welcome :-)
Agreed.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
>
> Regards, Dave.
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
Joshua D. Drake wrote: >>> limiting listed courses to states where companies are registered as >>> corporations... Such information is freely available, and it could be >>> required that companies provide a link to their articles of >>> incorporation in the states where they provide training - easy to check >>> without undue work on those that filter events... >> >> Limiting the number of listings is not in our interests - we want to > > It is, if the listings are not legitimate. Well, yes - I think that's a given. >> show how much PostgreSQL is being used. Perhaps more importantly, how >> *widely*. We'd want to list courses running in every state, even if they >> were all the same company. >> >> Charging would almost certainly cause us problems given our financial >> status. I suspect we could 'solicit donations', but that would obviously >> not have the desired effect. > > No it wouldn't because the larger the donation the higher up the page > the person would expect to be. Listings move up the page in chronological order so that the closest events are at the top. Ordering the page based on the donation given would make it horrendous to use for the people that actually might want training. >> Limiting to the states in which companies are registered is a nonsense >> as well - what about a company in Japan? How do we check them? Or what >> about EnterpriseDB UK Ltd for example who cover the whole EMEA region - >> would they (== we in case you didn't realise I work for them) be >> restricted to listing courses in England because that's where we're >> registered? >> > > Perhaps a requirement that a link to the actual registration page for > the class? Listing the details of where the class is etc... I thought those were a given as well, but it doesn't hurt to be reminded. Regards, Dave
Dave Page wrote: <blockquote cite="mid4644C90F.2010609@postgresql.org" type="cite"><pre wrap="">Joshua D. Drake wrote:
</pre><blockquotetype="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><pre wrap="">limiting listed courses to
stateswhere companies are registered as
corporations... Such information is freely available, and it could be
required that companies provide a link to their articles of
incorporation in the states where they provide training - easy to check
without undue work on those that filter events... </pre></blockquote><pre wrap="">Limiting the number of
listingsis not in our interests - we want to </pre></blockquote><pre wrap="">It is, if the listings are not
legitimate. </pre></blockquote><pre wrap="">
Well, yes - I think that's a given.
</pre><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><pre wrap="">show how much PostgreSQL is being used. Perhaps
moreimportantly, how
*widely*. We'd want to list courses running in every state, even if they
were all the same company.
Charging would almost certainly cause us problems given our financial
status. I suspect we could 'solicit donations', but that would obviously
not have the desired effect. </pre></blockquote><pre wrap="">No it wouldn't because the larger the donation the
higherup the page
the person would expect to be. </pre></blockquote><pre wrap="">
Listings move up the page in chronological order so that the closest
events are at the top. Ordering the page based on the donation given
would make it horrendous to use for the people that actually might want
training. </pre></blockquote> There is a good medium - charge (donate) for front page spaces (and just divide the
donationamount by the time until the course and give the highest ratio the best spots) and leave the "training event"
pagein chronological order (or do a google and put the "sponsored" ones at the top in a different color, etc).<br
/><blockquotecite="mid4644C90F.2010609@postgresql.org" type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><pre
wrap="">Limitingto the states in which companies are registered is a nonsense
as well - what about a company in Japan? How do we check them? Or what
about EnterpriseDB UK Ltd for example who cover the whole EMEA region -
would they (== we in case you didn't realise I work for them) be
restricted to listing courses in England because that's where we're
registered?
</pre></blockquote><pre wrap="">Perhaps a requirement that a link to the actual registration page for
the class? Listing the details of where the class is etc... </pre></blockquote><pre wrap="">
I thought those were a given as well, but it doesn't hurt to be reminded. </pre></blockquote><br /><pre
class="moz-signature"cols="72">Chander Ganesan
Open Technology Group, Inc.
One Copley Parkway, Suite 210
Morrisville, NC 27560
Phone: 877-258-8987/919-463-0999</pre>
Dave Page wrote: <blockquote cite="mid4644BECC.20908@postgresql.org" type="cite"><pre wrap="">Chander Ganesan wrote: </pre><blockquotetype="cite"><pre wrap="">I see your point. However, perhaps there is some other mechanism or restriction that can be put in place to limit the likelihood of this (one course of one type per month, a limitation on annual courses listed, or a "per listing" fee charged to not-for-free companies)? Such restrictions would at least limit abuse to some extent.. Or perhaps limiting listed courses to states where companies are registered as corporations... Such information is freely available, and it could be required that companies provide a link to their articles of incorporation in the states where they provide training - easy to check without undue work on those that filter events... </pre></blockquote><pre wrap=""> Limiting the number of listings is not in our interests - we want to show how much PostgreSQL is being used. Perhaps more importantly, how *widely*. We'd want to list courses running in every state, even if they were all the same company.</pre></blockquote> However, corporate marketing is not a quantifiable metric as to usage. I'dargue that the number of courses offered has no bearing on how widely or how much PostgreSQL is being used.<br /><blockquotecite="mid4644BECC.20908@postgresql.org" type="cite"><pre wrap="">Charging would almost certainly cause us problemsgiven our financial status. I suspect we could 'solicit donations', but that would obviously not have the desired effect. </pre></blockquote> Charging (or requiring a sizable donation to get "front page" status) wouldprovide a commercial entity an incentive to offer genuine events. We already make fairly regular donations throughSPI (btw, I was told there would be a donors page at some point...any ideas as to when that might appear?), and Idoubt that any commercial organization that makes a profit from PG would be loathe to donate 50% of the "per-head cost"for 1 student or something along those lines for each event listed....especially when they expect that they'll run aclass with a lot more than a single student. <br /><blockquote cite="mid4644BECC.20908@postgresql.org" type="cite"><prewrap="">Limiting to the states in which companies are registered is a nonsense as well - what about a company in Japan? How do we check them? Or what about EnterpriseDB UK Ltd for example who cover the whole EMEA region - would they (== we in case you didn't realise I work for them) be restricted to listing courses in England because that's where we're registered?</pre></blockquote> Yep, it's not nearly a perfect solution...<br /><blockquote cite="mid4644BECC.20908@postgresql.org"type="cite"><pre wrap=""> Don't misunderstand - I'm not trying to dodge the issue. I just don't think there's a straightforward solution :-( </pre><blockquote type="cite"><pre wrap="">If others (ourselves included) are forced to take the same action to be competitive then it results in a reduction in the usefulness of the tool. One could argue that removing it entirely to prevent abuse would be less disruptive than having PG related companies flounder due to the actions of a few "bad citizens". </pre></blockquote><pre wrap=""> Let's remember that there are no proven 'bad citizens'. Unless that should change, for you to 'take the same action' would mean scheduling more legitimate courses - which I'd welcome :-)</pre></blockquote> Understood. <br /><pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">ChanderGanesan Open Technology Group, Inc. One Copley Parkway, Suite 210 Morrisville, NC 27560 Phone: 877-258-8987/919-463-0999</pre><br /><blockquote cite="mid4644BECC.20908@postgresql.org" type="cite"><pre wrap=""> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"href="mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org">majordomo@postgresql.org</a> so that your messagecan get through to the mailing list cleanly </pre></blockquote>
> Charging (or requiring a sizable donation to get "front page" status)
> would provide a commercial entity an incentive to offer genuine events.
> We already make fairly regular donations through SPI (btw, I was told
> there would be a donors page at some point...any ideas as to when that
> might appear?), and I doubt that any commercial organization that makes
That's on me. There is some disagreement on how it should be done.
Joshua D. Drake
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
> Listings move up the page in chronological order so that the closest
> events are at the top. Ordering the page based on the donation given
> would make it horrendous to use for the people that actually might want
> training.
Sure that was my point :). It is a bad idea to try it from a donation
perspective.
>
>>> Limiting to the states in which companies are registered is a nonsense
>>> as well - what about a company in Japan? How do we check them? Or what
>>> about EnterpriseDB UK Ltd for example who cover the whole EMEA region -
>>> would they (== we in case you didn't realise I work for them) be
>>> restricted to listing courses in England because that's where we're
>>> registered?
>>>
>> Perhaps a requirement that a link to the actual registration page for
>> the class? Listing the details of where the class is etc...
>
> I thought those were a given as well, but it doesn't hurt to be reminded.
Well I meant from a, we check the page before we approve the listing idea.
Joshua D. Drake
>
> Regards, Dave
>
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 04:09:27PM -0400, Chander Ganesan wrote: > There is a good medium - charge (donate) for front page spaces (and just > divide the donation amount by the time until the course and give the > highest ratio the best spots) and leave the "training event" page in > chronological order (or do a google and put the "sponsored" ones at the > top in a different color, etc) That's pretty thin ice we're on, as I understand it. Making a direct link between announcement position and how much someone paid is in fact a case of selling paid advertising, and that's a sticky area for a non-profit to be in. A -- Andrew Sullivan | ajs@crankycanuck.ca This work was visionary and imaginative, and goes to show that visionary and imaginative work need not end up well. --Dennis Ritchie