[theme-reviewers] What is wrong with you people? You rejectedTarski?
kikizas at gmail.com
Fri Sep 24 13:50:49 UTC 2010
On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 4:02 PM, Edward Caissie
<edward.caissie at gmail.com> wrote:
> As Chip Bennett wrote: '... the term "reject". It is inaccurate and
> needlessly inflammatory. We are not "rejecting" anything. We're simply
> pointing out things that need to be fixed before "approving" something." ...
> and this is exactly the case. We have several resolutions that can be used
> and perhaps their wording carries an unwanted connotative meaning but
> essentially the "not-accepted" resolution that everyone appears to be suck
> on simply means the theme needs some sort of corrective measures to be taken
> to meet the Theme Review criteria and be approved for the Theme repository.
Please, spare me the “inflammatory” speech, and stop playing with
words. This here is a serious matter.
And the simple fact of it all is that the submission was turned down,
Ben did not resubmit (he obviously has better things to do in his life
than indulging the absurd requirements of this team), he then went
on to release the new version on the Tarski homepage, and WordPress
Extend is still in version 2.6 from March 2010.
If you don’t understand what all this means, let me make it clear for you:
This team here is driving people away. In this case, it is driving
away one of the jewels of the WordPress coding community.
 Here is a striking example of an absurd requirement: That we must
use body_class() and post_class() in our themes. Could this demand be
any more absurd? It could not? Wrong! Just direct it to the author
of Tarski, who wrote himself the core WordPress functions based on
existing implementations in Sandbox and in his own Tarski. :-o
More information about the theme-reviewers