Re: RFC: Stance on advertising on the list

[Chris Travers <..hidden..>]

On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 3:55 PM, David <..hidden..> wrote:
> I've paid Chris for small jobs in the past and was happy to do so. I
> would definitely pay for help again in the future if I needed it.
>
> Having said that, I think it would be tricky having complicated
> guidelines for advertising. If I were the advertising god I would do it
> this way:
>
> * List of providers on a page on the website, with relevant experience
> and credentials
> * Offer of services in emails limited to signatures only - NOT in the
> body of an answer.

I think there is a difference between offering services along with
other options in the body of the email and being aggressive.  I'd go
so far as to say that trolling for work would be seen as disrespectful
and I'd warn/ban people who go that route.

>
> When I've needed paid software help, I based my choice on  the value of
> mailing list posts or commits to the software itself. They turn out to
> be very reliable indicators.


Agreed.
>
> I don't think any of us would want an excellent list like this to fill
> up with trolling for work.

Agreed here.

I guess there is a difference between the following responses to a
request for installation help:

"I'd be happy to install it for you for a fee."

and

"As I understand it, you are probably running into problems getting
DBD::Pg to install.  You are either going to need to install
appropriate development packages if you want to use CPAN or you may
find it easier to install via your package manager.  You say you are
on Ubuntu so iirc you can do this by apt-get install libdbd-pg-perl.
 Hopefully this get you going.  Also, if you decide it's too much
trouble or you keep running into issues, I'd be happy to install it
for you for a fee."

I think most of us would bristle at someone who doesn't offer any
other help other than the first one, but I think the second one is
reasonable.

Best Wishes,
Chris Travers