[CMS-Forum] Starphire Technologies releases free 'Lite Edition' of SiteSage CMS application

[John Luxford]

On Feb 3, 2004, at 9:52 PM, Adam Fields wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 04, 2004 at 02:52:50AM +0100, Brice Dunwoodie wrote:
>> I hate to sounds a little jaded here, but given that this is in fact a
>> public "channel" of information, with an identifiable character, we 
>> are
>> bound to invite the spectrum of such information.
>>
>> I will speak for myself and say that I am here for both personal and
>> business reasons, and will assume this applies to others.
>>
>> Getting upset that people seek to use this channel for business 
>> reasons
>> seems a tad unrealistic. Posting etiquette guidelines and developing a
>> community that communicates in less generic linguistic patterns would 
>> be
>> pleasurable; I'm sure for all of us.
>
> There's a very big difference between having a discussion about a
> problem and proferring a solution (which should still be done
> off-list) and bombarding the list with PR release information that no
> one asked for and most don't want.

I'd like to clarify a point: Do you mean proffering a solution as in 
soliciting your product as said solution, or simply offering a 
theoretic/technical solution?  I'm assuming the former, because without 
the latter you'd simply have a list/archive of questions with no 
answers, not very useful. :)

Based on the discussions on the cms-list of old, it didn't seem 
inappropriate or off-base for people to use their own CMS's 
implementation of said solution as a basis for their explanations.  
However, according to your statement, would this be better to be taken 
off-list where it could only benefit the single recipient?

Regarding PR announcements, I definitely agree that there's a clear 
limit there as to the appropriateness of such messages (I'll grant 
Michael Murdock the benefit of the doubt this time... ;)).  Hopefully, 
discretion is practiced by all, or at least by most.

>
> Practically speaking, in order to have discussions that are useful to
> any of us, the noise needs to be both discouraged and filtered
> out. Useful as they may be under the right circumstances, product
> announcements qualify as noise in this kind of arena. And it has to be
> all or none. As was evident on Cam and Phil's cms-list, if you allow
> anything like this at all, it quickly overruns the actual
> discussion. Allow one, and everyone feels like they not only can, but
> they have to.
>
> That said, I disagree with Mike's assertion that you should not post
> if you stand to benefit financially from it. We're all here for
> business - I don't think I've ever heard of someone who does CMS as a
> hobby, actually. But there's a long way to go between being a group of
> professionals having a discussion and being a free spam channel for
> products that may seem unique to the people responsible for selling
> them, but which actually aren't all that inventive. And if they
> are... then find a way to work them into the conversation and tell us
> what you're doing that's interesting.

Agreed.  To mandate no financial interest from the folks posting here 
would be asking for a zero-member CMS forum, more than likely.  So I'll 
take insidious product plugs over overt PR ones any day.  Anyone second 
this? ;)

Cheers,

Lux

--
Sitellite CMS - Evolve your business.
http://www.sitellite.org/