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

Sun Jul 3 22:17:48 UTC 2011

Nacin is not a member of the WPTRT. He is a core contributor, if not
currently the *lead* core contributor. His merit is based on more
contributions to WordPress in one year than either you or I will make in our
lifetimes. With respect to WordPress core code, *Nacin's word is the
gold-standard*. Given that he contributes to these discussions voluntarily
and at our request, I personally don't take kindly to what you have written.

Given that 1) your comments continue to devolve into streams of *ad hominem*,
and 2) two other WPTRT admins have already weighed in, concurring on the
issue, I'm going to take off my *personal opinion* hat, and put on my *WPTRT
admin* hat. Consider the following statement to be the *current, official
WPTRT policy*:

*What you are proposing will not be permitted for repository-hosted Themes.
There may be other, valid uses of ob_cache, which would be considered on a
case-by-case basis; but the use you're proposing will not be accepted.*

Given that this thread demonstrates absolutely no potential for any further,
constructive purpose, I am requesting that it not be continued.

Chip

On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Darren Slatten <darrenslatten at gmail.com>wrote:

> *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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20110703/582d8531/attachment-0001.htm>