[theme-reviewers] Question: Someone Want to Take Benefit From a 'Top Reviewer of the Month'.

[Chip Bennett]

Let's be realistic: a commercial Theme shop devoting labor costs to review
Themes is primarily a matter of helping to ensure that the Theme shop can
have their Theme featured. Or is it only coincidence that commercial Theme
shops started participating in Theme Review when we began the incentive
program?

This is not a dig at commercial Theme shops. I have no issue whatsoever
with the practice, and how they spend their labor costs is entirely their
prerogative. But it isn't helpful to this discussion to pretend that their
motivation is anything other than getting a Theme featured.

And the contention that the Featured Themes listing doesn't have a
commercial impact is demonstrably false. Agree or disagree with using that
impact as part of a marketing/business plan; that's fine. But the impact
exists nonetheless. Again, it isn't helpful to a discussion such as this
one to ignore (or to try to discount) reality.

The reality is that the Featured Themes listing has a demonstrable impact
to the developers who have Themes listed as Featured: number of installs,
site traffic, etc. The reality is that said impact has a commercial impact
for developers who have commercial Theme business plans (upsell Themes,
separate free/commercial Themes, etc.). So, by allowing upsell Themes in
the directory, by allowing commercial Theme developers to host free Themes
in the directory, and by having a very prominently displayed list of
Featured Themes in the directory, we have a system that inherently drives a
financial impact/interest to commercial Theme developers.

That's the system in which we're working, and it creates an obvious tension
for the Theme Review Team. Personally, I do my utmost to separate any
commercial endeavors (client work, etc.) from my role with the Theme Review
Team. I don't even like dealing with Featured Themes, because it puts the
team - and especially the admins - an a very tight spot, because it creates
an environment where there is the possibility of a perception of
conflict-of-interest/preferential treatment.

The review incentive program isn't the problem; it merely exposes a symptom.

Treating a one-man operation differently from a Theme shop comes across as
preferential treatment. Either paying people to conduct Theme reviews in
order to have the opportunity to list a Theme as "Featured" is acceptable
or it is unacceptable - for anyone and everyone.

I honestly don't care which way the decision is made - but I very much care
that the decision is fair and consistent.


On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Otto <otto at ottodestruct.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 8:44 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>
> wrote:
> > For the sake of discussion: how is this any different from commercial
> Theme
> > shops paying their employees to perform Theme reviews, with the expressed
> > intent of ensuring that one of the Theme shop's Themes gets listed as
> > featured?
>
> A theme shop doesn't hire somebody to review themes, they hire them to
> create themes.
>
> I would argue that reviewing themes makes one a better theme developer
> overall. It should be the goal of a "theme shop" to improve their own
> abilities and such. Getting themes featured would be a possible
> side-benefit only.
>
> And realistically, if that's their marketing strategy, it's kind of a
> crappy one. They'd be better off advertising in other ways. The
> featured themes area is not how most people find themes.
>
>
> > In other words: why is it acceptable for commercial Theme shops to
> engage in
> > this sort of financial transaction to gain a benefit from WordPress.org,
> but
> > not for non-commercial developers?
>
> There is a difference between paying somebody for their work vs.
> paying them to exploit one of our programs.
>
> If everybody really thinks that this is acceptable, then the incentive
> program has ultimately failed and should be replaced with one that is
> not subject to being gamed like this.
>
> -Otto
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140129/1b4d703e/attachment.html>