I want to retract my objection to commercial messages. I think Ted's position is more reasonable: on-topic commercial messages that are responsive to (and maybe even anticipatory of) users' needs will likely be welcomed by many subscribed here.
Producing a policy statement that perfectly captures this idea seems hard, though. I jumped the gun, maybe in part because the flavor of Peter's message was persuasive rather than factual, and that seemed to me to cross a line, albeit an unwritten one. Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: Ted Dunning [mailto:ted.dunn...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 1:11 AM > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: How to accelerate your Solr-Lucene appication by 4x > > On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 1:40 AM, Darren Govoni <dar...@ontrenet.com> > wrote: > > > And to be honest, many people on this list are professionals who not > only > > build their own solutions, but also buy tools and tech. > > > > I don't see what the big deal is if some clever company has something of > > imminent value here to share it. Considering that its a rare event. > > > > I would consider it if it were of eminent value, but not if it were > imminent or immanent. > > Seriously, let's set the bar that blatantly commercial postings be at > least > responsive to something as opposed to just spam that happens to be > slightly > related to the mailing list. > > For instance, if a SAS rep wanted to post an answer of the form "Mahout > doesn't, but SAS does" on the Mahout mailing list, I would be thrilled. > If > they posted their monthly newsletter, I would be pissed. The first kind > of > answer adds value, the second siphons value off.
