[theme-reviewers] Featured Themes

[Peter Kakoma]

I'm with everyone...I've been through the dark days; anyone against the
incentive scheme clearly has no idea how things were "way back when".
*pulls up a seat* I have a theme I first submitted in January; got reviewed
over two months later, rejected. Re-submitted immediately since the issues
were very minor...waited over two months again. Same cycle, repeat.
With the new system, my theme got reviewed and approved in ONE DAY (after a
wait of over 8 months, pre-this-awesome-era). If the new scheme were a
person, I'd spam it with thank you mail to show my appreciation. And buy it
coffee. And walk its dog. And do its laundry; ok, no laundry


On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Emil Uzelac <emil at uzelac.me> wrote:

> Program works well and we don't need to change anything at this point :)
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Jasper Kips <jasper at planetkips.nl> wrote:
>
>> Well, do it oldschool. You know pre facebook, with: +1
>>
>> Jasper Kips,
>> Always waiting for the ricochet
>>
>> Op 9 okt. 2013 om 17:34 heeft Daniel Tara <contact at onedesigns.com> het
>> volgende geschreven:
>>
>> This mailing list should have a 'Like' feature :)
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On 09.10.2013, at 18:00, manish gori <manish_gori at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Themes are getting reviewed fast now...May be you are not aware of the
>> old slow days..Reviewers are very well deserved to feature them..
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 08:18:55 -0400
>> From: chip at chipbennett.net
>> To: theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> Subject: Re: [theme-reviewers] Featured Themes
>>
>> Why should the top three Reviewers not be allowed to select their own
>> Theme to be featured?
>>
>> Only three of the 12-15 "featured" Themes are selected by Reviewers. Thus
>> far, the incentive program has been wildly successful: the review queue has
>> been slashed, ticket turnaround time has been slashed, more Themes are
>> completing the review process, more approved Themes are available in the
>> directory, Reviewers get a modicum of incentive for a very rigorous,
>> all-volunteer activity, and the "Featured" Themes list rotation increases.
>>
>> I see absolutely nothing at all unfair with the review incentive program,
>> or with allowing the top three monthly Reviewers to select their own Themes
>> to be featured.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 5:22 AM, Charlie Livingston <
>> kingbluebeard at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>  May I make a suggestion? That theme reviewers should not be able to
>> choose their own themes to be featured, as this is unfair to all the theme
>> authors who aren't reviewers/don't have the time to review as many themes.
>> Thanks,
>> Charlie
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ theme-reviewers mailing
>> list theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>
>


-- 
http://kakoma.ug
www.urbanlegendkampala.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20131009/c52e24ce/attachment-0001.html>