On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 7:02 AM, Mani A <a.mani.cms@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Vendors should clearly state the quality of the media being used. I do not agree with this. I think vendors should be required to have a stated warranty on the media to be listed. Individual customers can choose vendors based on the terms of the competing warranties and on quality by doing the comparison shopping on their own. I think its very inappropriate for "the project" to get into the business of ranking individual vendors. If they have a warranty on media, and abide by the terms of that warranty then that is what matters. If they aren't abiding by the terms of the warranty they offer customers, then they get pulled of the list. I do not think we are equipped to make a media quality assessment in any substantial way. It's not like we are going to be pulling random samples from their service and doing the quality assurance testing ourselves. Bad media happens, even when using media vendors who are thought to have statistically few problems with their media products. When bad media happens we must rely on the vendors to stand behind the terms of the warranty statements in place at the time of sale. If they can't live up to the warranty statements then they get booted from our list. At the most we can set some minimum threshold as to the expected warranty terms to be listed...for all vendors...including our free media project. > We also need to distinguish between those who do it for excessive > profit and those who do not. Market forces decide what is excessive and what is not. If you find one vendor's price is excessive then you, and every individual customer, can choose another vendor. For all we know the higher priced vendors have additional quality control procedures which ensure a higher quality service. I'm not going to punish a vendor who wants to set a higher price in exchange for a more reliable retail service than its competitors. If they feel the market can support the higher price along side less expensive retail services...then they should be allowed to compete. It's not our place to set the nominal market price. That's called price fixing.. and that's generally a bad idea. -jef -- Fedora-marketing-list mailing list Fedora-marketing-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
