Return to Question

Possible Duplicate:
legitimate ways for users to protest irrelevant sponsorship of tags

Ok, fine, Redgate has tools for Exchange and SQL Server, so maybe it makes sense to have the annoying little rg on exchange and sql-server tags (although it's arguable even there, since not every Exchange question is about archiving, and that's what all Redgate's ads are for).

But there are also rg's on email and backup tags, which make no sense at all. The first page of questions tagged "email" has only a few Exchange questions, so it's irrelevant to have ads for an Exchange archiving tool all over the place.

How about getting rid of the rg's altogether?

Possible Duplicate:
legitimate ways for users to protest irrelevant sponsorship of tags

Ok, fine, Redgate has tools for Exchange and SQL Server, so maybe it makes sense to have the annoying little rg on exchange and sql-server tags (although it's arguable even there, since not every Exchange question is about archiving, and that's what all Redgate's ads are for).

But there are also rg's on email and backup tags, which make no sense at all. The first page of questions tagged "email" has only a few Exchange questions, so it's irrelevant to have ads for an Exchange archiving tool all over the place.

How about getting rid of the rg's altogether?

 

Possible Duplicate:
 legitimate ways for users to protest irrelevant sponsorship of tags  

Ok, fine, Redgate has tools for Exchange and SQL Server, so maybe it makes sense to have the annoying little rg on exchange and sql-server tags (although it's arguable even there, since not every Exchange question is about archiving, and that's what all Redgate's ads are for).

But there are also rg's on email and backup tags, which make no sense at all. The first page of questions tagged "email" has only a few Exchange questions, so it's irrelevant to have ads for an Exchange archiving tool all over the place.

How about getting rid of the rg's altogether?

 

Possible Duplicate: 
legitimate ways for users to protest irrelevant sponsorship of tags

Ok, fine, Redgate has tools for Exchange and SQL Server, so maybe it makes sense to have the annoying little rg on exchange and sql-server tags (although it's arguable even there, since not every Exchange question is about archiving, and that's what all Redgate's ads are for).

But there are also rg's on email and backup tags, which make no sense at all. The first page of questions tagged "email" has only a few Exchange questions, so it's irrelevant to have ads for an Exchange archiving tool all over the place.

How about getting rid of the rg's altogether?

 

Possible Duplicate:
legitimate ways for users to protest irrelevant sponsorship of tags

Ok, fine, Redgate has tools for Exchange and SQL Server, so maybe it makes sense to have the annoying little rg on exchange and sql-server tags (although it's arguable even there, since not every Exchange question is about archiving, and that's what all Redgate's ads are for).

But there are also rg's on email and backup tags, which make no sense at all. The first page of questions tagged "email" has only a few Exchange questions, so it's irrelevant to have ads for an Exchange archiving tool all over the place.

How about getting rid of the rg's altogether?

 

Possible Duplicate:
legitimate ways for users to protest irrelevant sponsorship of tags

Ok, fine, Redgate has tools for Exchange and SQL Server, so maybe it makes sense to have the annoying little rg on exchange and sql-server tags (although it's arguable even there, since not every Exchange question is about archiving, and that's what all Redgate's ads are for).

But there are also rg's on email and backup tags, which make no sense at all. The first page of questions tagged "email" has only a few Exchange questions, so it's irrelevant to have ads for an Exchange archiving tool all over the place.

How about getting rid of the rg's altogether?