On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 09:30:58AM +1030, Antony Blakey wrote: > OK, my vote is that we avoid any judgement. Each link should have a > brief explanation both of what it is - and that's as simple as 'porn > site' - and how it uses couch i.e. justification for it's inclusion on > that page.
This seams like a reasonable way forward. How do we handle links without the required explanation? All of the current links require modification from the original poster in order to be compliant with this proposed policy. > Furthermore, the page should have an explicit disclaimer at the top of > the page about it NOT being an endorsement, and warning people to read > the site description. Agreed. > Personally, I'd like to see some porn site links on that page. Porn > sites have particular operation/traffic requirements, and if I saw that > CouchDB was suitable for that, I'd be more comfortable about building a > media server on CouchDB. Someone on IRC mentioned Oracle has some porn sites listed as clients. -- Noah Slater, http://tumbolia.org/nslater
