El 10/06/14 19:25, Justin Clift escribió: > On 10/06/2014, at 11:03 PM, Rodrigo Gonzalez wrote: >> El 10/06/14 18:49, John Gardeniers escribió: >>> Despite the good intentions behind this idea I see a number of problems. >>> Here are a couple for starters: >>> >>> 1 - In what order will they be displayed, bearing in mind that anyone >>> not listed near the top is unlikely to get any benefit from such listing. >>> >>> 2 - Once this starts there will most likely be those who are prepared to >>> pay/bribe for preferential listing. How will that be addressed. I'm sure >>> the income would be appreciated but where does it end and how would it >>> be controlled? >>> >>> Regards, >>> John >> >> For 1 it is clear to me....random order so each client will get a >> different list, does this make sense? > > Heh, I'm more of a "lets get something working, then adjust as needed" > type of person. At the moment only three organisations have asked to be > added. > > Initially I'm thinking to have the list sorted by geography or timezone > covered or something. Lets see how many entries there are first. May > or may not need to get creative right at the very start. ;) I have to disagree, fixing later can be a lot of work and problems (OK, doing it "smart" from start is a lot of work too...or not....I dont know yet)...but, do you know how many USD are spent daily to get first in google results? so, the same, if you have...let's say....10 entries, the difference for first one and last one can be huge....but maybe I am wrong (nobody will know until this is done).... > > >> About 2, I dont think a community list would accept payments or other >> kind of things....or yes, but list would not be changed cause of >> that...so random again...or in the "worst" ( for me) situation a >> different link for them > > > With 2, again "let see how we go". While the list is short, it shouldn't > be a problem (hopefully). If things start getting out of hand, we'll > obviously need to come up with some practical ideas. This is for me a different problem than first one....I dont want and I wont get any money from anyone to get better in the list (maybe it wont happen at all)....but I think a clear policy from start is better than your idea of "let's see" > > Note - I'm pretty strongly "for" this general idea. Sure there are > potential drawbacks if things go badly. But there are also potential > benefits for people if it goes well. Let's try it out (aiming for the > positives side) and see what happens. ;) Again, let's try to make it "good" from start....if we can just make everyone "the same" (and excuse me cause I am not sure if this is clear in my poor English), let's start doing that... BTW, you can consider myself to help with anything required for this...except writing in English please :) Best regards Rodrigo _______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
