On 04/05/2017 10:45 AM, Adrian Klaver wrote:
On 04/05/2017 10:26 AM, Tim Clarke wrote:
+1 Joshua, that's the best reason I've heard so far and it seems very
powerful to me. The more readers we have and the easier they can
communicate with us (doesn't matter if they are "wrong") then the
better all round for Postgres.
This implies that ease of communication = quality of communication and I
am not buying it. Exhibit A, Twitter.
Adrian,
I am afraid that you misunderstand the problem. The idea that you would
use Twitter as the example is a perfect illustration of this. Twitter is
*not* a collaboration platform. It is a promotion platform and it does
it very well.
Stack Overflow (as an example) is a collaboration platform. Stack
understands the problem and is very, very good at solving it. It is why
they are successful.
Another example of a very good platform (that I can't stand) is Slack.
It has become so completely dominant in the growth space that even
Google is changing Hangouts because people were leaving in droves.
So the question is, what is the problem we are trying to solve?
I posed that the problem is that we are hostile toward communities that
don't communicate and collaborate in the way we feel is "correct".
You have proved that the way I posed the problem is accurate.
Thank you for your participation,
JD
--
Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/
+1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
Unless otherwise stated, opinions are my own.
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
