I think that 50$ per line is a bit out there.  Maybe $0.10 per line *
number of people on the mailing list.  Then we are charging for a
measurable/growing number of people.
I also think that you should run it by a lawyer for proofing.
		-DEJ 

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	ocie@paracel.com [SMTP:ocie@paracel.com]
> Sent:	Friday, May 08, 1998 4:25 PM
> To:	pgsql-hackers@hub.org
> Subject:	[HACKERS] Your Search Engine Listing (fwd)
> 
> list@ListMe.com wrote:
> > From owner-pgsql-hackers@hub.org Fri May  8 09:25:01 1998
> > Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 11:18:42 -0400
> > Message-Id: <199805081518.LAA22620@rover.listme.com>
> > From: list@ListMe.com
> > To: pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
> > Reply-To: list@ListMe.com
> > Subject: [HACKERS] Your Search Engine Listing
> > Sender: owner-pgsql-hackers@hub.org
> > Precedence: bulk
> > 
> > To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org 
> > 
> >      Is your site listed with the top search engines?  ListMe will 
> >      list you with 50 search engines and indexes for $90. 
> >      Satisfaction guaranteed! 
> > 
> > Search engines are the only way most people have to find internet
> sites.
> > But if your site is not listed, no one will find it.
> 
> BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH
> 
> It seems that no fileter will make us truly immune from SPAM, so for
> better or worse, here is my proposed spam-hunter (tm) clause:
> 
> Purpose of the mailing list
> 
> The primary purpose of this mailing list is the discussion of ongoing
> work to the Postgres database.  Discussions of other databases,
> especially as they compare with Postgres are also 'on topic'.  Any
> commercial postings including, but not limited to: Chain letters,
> Pyramid schemes, "Make Money Fast", direct marketing schemes, web site
> advertising, software advertising or any other type of advertising are
> considered unsolicited email (SPAM).
> 
> These SPAM postings waste the time and resources of the volunteer
> Postgres developers.  Therefore, in the interest of keeping the
> Postgres mailing list free SPAM, the Postgres organization will charge
> a fee of $50 per line for all such postings.  In addition to the $50
> per line, fees may be charged for expenses related to collecting the
> fee, including, but not limited to: postage, detective services and
> collection services.
> 
> 
> 
> I voulenteer myself as an Internet PI.  I don't think it makes much
> sense to pay someone up-front to track down a spammer.
> 
> So what does everyone think?
> 
> Ocie

Fri, 8 May 1998 16:49:31 -0500
"Jackson, DeJuan" <djackson@cpsgroup.com>
RE: [HACKERS] Your Search Engine Listing (fwd)
Jackson, DeJuan wrote:
> 
> I think that 50$ per line is a bit out there.  Maybe $0.10 per line *
> number of people on the mailing list.  Then we are charging for a
> measurable/growing number of people.
> I also think that you should run it by a lawyer for proofing.
> 		-DEJ 

That sounds like a good idea.  As for the cost -- why don't we set it
so that it comes out to $50 per line.  What is $50 / number of
subsribers?

Ocie

Fri, 8 May 1998 15:16:13 -0700 (PDT)
ocie@paracel.com
Re: [HACKERS] Your Search Engine Listing (fwd)
On Fri, 8 May 1998 ocie@paracel.com wrote:

> Jackson, DeJuan wrote:
> > 
> > I think that 50$ per line is a bit out there.  Maybe $0.10 per line *
> > number of people on the mailing list.  Then we are charging for a
> > measurable/growing number of people.
> > I also think that you should run it by a lawyer for proofing.
> > 		-DEJ 
> 
> That sounds like a good idea.  As for the cost -- why don't we set it
> so that it comes out to $50 per line.  What is $50 / number of
> subsribers?

	pgsql-questions == ~1000 subscribers +/-


Fri, 8 May 1998 18:41:33 -0400 (EDT)
The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>
Re: [HACKERS] Your Search Engine Listing (fwd)