[theme-reviewers] Question about ob_start and ob_get_clean (Vicky Arulsingam)

[Darren Slatten]

>
> *People don't respect the opinions of leaders because of their
> responsibilities. In a meritocracy, they earn respect and responsibility
> based on their opinions.
> *


This is the second time I've heard "meritocracy" being referenced, so I'd
like to address it directly. If you want recognition for the things you've
contributed in the past, then why are we using a mailing list? I assumed it
was a deliberate choice, intended to keep the focus on the facts. If it was
an arbitrary decision, then let's move to a platform that supports a
meritocracy--something like a phpBB forum, where everyone can see (1) when
you joined, (2) how many responses you've contributed, etc. Right now, the
only information I can base your "merit" on is limited to your 2 responses
in this thread. Unfortunately, neither of your responses included any usable
information, and both contain flawed reasoning. Additionally, your responses
are self-centered, which leads me to believe that your primary concern is
your own ego. For example, out of everything I've said over the past few
days, the part you directly responded to contains your name. Think about it.

BTW...this statement:

*In a meritocracy, they earn respect and responsibility based on their
> opinions.*
>

...is simply wrong. Responsibilities are distributed according to each
individual's *actions* and the results of those actions.



*You're misusing appeal to authority. The fallacy is that because I have
> authority, I must be right. We never presented you with that premise,
> however, and provided many others. You can't spout "appeal to authority"
> whenever you disagree with the outlined reasons. Period.
> *


Not only is most of this blatantly false, but it barely passes as a cohesive
thought. Also, a premise is something that's assumed to be true. The problem
here is that you and several others keep trying to pass off your opinions as
true statements. Examples of statements that are not premises include things
like "a theme should be a theme" and "output buffering is never appropriate
for use in themes." The first example lacks a clear definition and neither
example has been established as a fundamental truth.



*I think we're done here. You're welcome to post your theme-plugin hybrid
> output-buffering frankenstein thing on your own site.
> *


...and I shall call it...THUGGINSTEIN!  [cue thunder/lightning/ominous
music]



I'm not sure if you realize this, but so far no one has been able to provide
a reason for rejecting my code example. There's been plenty of philosophical
banter, chest thumping, name dropping, and all-around circle jerking, but
surely that's not sufficient to construct absolute policies out
of--especially ones that would require me to make my theme *less useful* to
end users. My ultimate goal is to develop a theme that offers the greatest
value to my users. I'm being forced to take a deliberate step in the
opposite direction of that goal, and I don't think it's at all unreasonable
for me to expect an objective reason for doing so.





On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Andrew Nacin <wp at andrewnacin.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 7:41 AM, Darren Slatten <darrenslatten at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Your argument is a textbook example of invalid reasoning based on a
>> logical fallacy that's been understood and documented for hundreds of
>> years. It's not like I'm making this stuff up. And don't forget: I'm not
>> saying "everyone is wrong"--I'm only saying *"Yes-huh...you can even go
>> ask Andrew Nacin!"* is not a valid argument.
>
>
> People don't respect the opinions of leaders because of their
> responsibilities. In a meritocracy, they earn respect and responsibility
> based on their opinions.
>
> From an old essay [1] stemming from the GNOME project, "In the presence of
> good rationale, maintainers should be willing to change their mind often."
> You've failed to meet the first part.
>
> You're misusing appeal to authority. The fallacy is that because I have
> authority, I must be right. We never presented you with that premise,
> however, and provided many others. You can't spout "appeal to authority"
> whenever you disagree with the outlined reasons. Period.
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 3:29 AM, Otto <otto at ottodestruct.com> wrote:
>
>> Look, if you can't even agree on the simple fact that a theme is
>> supposed to be a *theme*, then this discussion is getting into the
>> "pointless" territory pretty darned fast.
>>
>
> +1.
>
> I think we're done here. You're welcome to post your theme-plugin hybrid
> output-buffering frankenstein thing on your own site.
>
>
>
> [1] http://ometer.com/features.html
>
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>
>


-- 
-Darren Slatten
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20110703/51f86412/attachment.htm>