[theme-reviewers] Need Clarification on theme name which is fine as per the guideline and as per the other theme names !

Wed Jul 23 00:11:37 UTC 2014

If TRT is opposed to being word police, then we should get back to the
better things :)
This discussion is moot, seems to be happening a lot these days.

On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 5:37 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:

> So, any Theme name that returns even one search result hit should be
> disallowed?
>
> No, I don't find that to be practical, or reasonable.
>
> If I've offered nothing constructive, it's because - again - I am
> adamantly opposed to the TRT being the Word Police.
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 6:56 PM, Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Where is the subjectivity, ambiguity in should result in zero results.
>> Looks to me you are closed to discussion, if so there is no point. You
>> have offered nothing constructive.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 5:20 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Too much subjectivity. Too much ambiguity. How much is "too much" SEO
>>> positioning? How many search result hits are too many?
>>>
>>> Sorry, this is unenforceable. We have better things to do with our time.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 6:46 PM, Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> If you look at https://www.google.com/#q=%22reptio+wordpress+theme%22
>>>> you will see that there are no results and there are no results because
>>>> there is no business segment/audience called "reptio". Anyone naming their
>>>> theme reptio is doing so for uniqueness, branding.
>>>>
>>>> If you look at
>>>> https://www.google.com/#q=%22premium+photography+wordpress+theme%22
>>>> there are a ton of themes because photography is a huge business segment.
>>>> Anyone naming their theme "Premium photography" is doing so to gain an
>>>> advantage over those results using wordpress.org domain authority and
>>>> link juice provided by WordPress users.
>>>>
>>>> If you want to frame a guideline it can be something like this:
>>>> Theme names are required to be unique and free of any industry
>>>> keywords/buzzwords and void of any SEO intent/advantage. SEO
>>>> intent/advantage will be checked using a simple phrase match google search
>>>> with wordpress theme appended to theme name and should result in zero
>>>> results.
>>>>
>>>> Sure there maybe some false positives but it should be acceptable.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 4:30 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Honestly? No, I can't look at those search results and find anything
>>>>> explicit, objective, and fair by which to craft an enforceable Guideline.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 5:27 PM, Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>  shutting up but one final question :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> you can't see the difference between the following and form a
>>>>>> guideline?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.google.com/#q=%22premium+photography+wordpress+theme%22
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> https://www.google.com/#q=%22reptio+wordpress+theme%22
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 3:37 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Judging the intent of Theme name" = 100% subjective. No guideline
>>>>>>> can reasonably be crafted to be fair, objective, or enforceable. We have a
>>>>>>> difficult enough time getting all reviewers to understand what "GPL
>>>>>>> compatible" means. Do you really think we have a prayer of being successful
>>>>>>> at making reviewers all experts in SEO?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In what way does Theme name correlate to Theme quality? Making
>>>>>>> developers jump through hoops to come up with Theme names isn't going to
>>>>>>> make them magically improve their code or design quality.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It isn't the role of the TRT to police for abuse of WPORG's domain
>>>>>>> authority. Our role is to ensure that Themes hosted in the official Theme
>>>>>>> directory are of the best-possible quality, providing the best possible
>>>>>>> experience for end users. The TRT doesn't speak for the WP Foundation. Otto
>>>>>>> does, and has spoken. Any obvious SEO/spam will be dealt with - harshly, I
>>>>>>> daresay - by him.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why should reviewers be conducting Google searches? And what are
>>>>>>>> they supposed to do with the results?
>>>>>>>> To judge the intent of theme name, ton of relevant results = SEO
>>>>>>>> intent
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> what do those efforts provide in end-user benefits?
>>>>>>>> To make theme authors create decent themes instead of
>>>>>>>> half/quarter/zero decent ones and depend on SEO tricks.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What I don't understand is why would WP foundation want their
>>>>>>>> directory and domain authority abused like this?
>>>>>>>> Please answer this and I will shut up.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 3:21 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net
>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Why should reviewers be conducting Google searches? And what are
>>>>>>>>> they supposed to do with the results? And most importantly: what do those
>>>>>>>>> efforts provide in end-user benefits?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 4:47 PM, Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com
>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Made up words have least potential to be an SEO keywords, but if
>>>>>>>>>> you don't want to ban dictionaries, a simple google search with WordPress
>>>>>>>>>> theme as an append to that theme name would reveal its intent.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ex:
>>>>>>>>>> There will be almost nill relevant results for "Oenology
>>>>>>>>>> Wordpress Theme" before it was created by you.
>>>>>>>>>> There will be nill relevant results for "sharpet wordpress theme"
>>>>>>>>>> There will be nill relevant results for "reptio wordpress theme"
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> There will be a ton of relevant results for "wine wordpress theme"
>>>>>>>>>> There will be a ton of relevant results for "premium photography
>>>>>>>>>> wordpress theme"
>>>>>>>>>> There will be a ton of relevant results for "mobile first
>>>>>>>>>> wordpress theme"
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And a simple search is so very easy to perform and easy to judge.
>>>>>>>>>> that would be about 0.1% of workload for a reviewer. This is all assuming
>>>>>>>>>> we don't want the directory to be :
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.wordpress.org/themes/premium-photography
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.wordpress.org/themes/premium-responsive-photography
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.wordpress.org/themes/responsive-photography
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.wordpress.org/themes/responsive-small-business
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.wordpress.org/themes/premium-mobile-first
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.wordpress.org/themes/one-page-mobile-first
>>>>>>>>>> etc
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 2:41 AM, Chip Bennett <
>>>>>>>>>> chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> We're talking in circles. I'm merely explaining the current
>>>>>>>>>>> Guideline. You're asking for a *new* Guideline.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Names like divi, avada, kyan, bron are fair/enforceable
>>>>>>>>>>> because those made up names are not SEO keywords"
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Please try to think through that assertion to its logical
>>>>>>>>>>> conclusions, including all intended and unintended consequences. "SEO
>>>>>>>>>>> Keyword" is not some fixed definition. It depends on context. Again, I'll
>>>>>>>>>>> use my own Theme as the example: under your suggestion, "Oenology" would
>>>>>>>>>>> not be a permissible Theme name, because it is a real word (i.e. not a
>>>>>>>>>>> made-up word) that could be used for SEO purposes.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So do we throw out the entire English dictionary? And why just
>>>>>>>>>>> the English dictionary? What about Spanish? Or Latin? or Chinese? And if we
>>>>>>>>>>> don't blanket-ban dictionary words: who gets to decide the context and
>>>>>>>>>>> intent of a term used in/as a Theme name, to determine if that use is for
>>>>>>>>>>> "SEO" purposes or not?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Is that really where you think we should be going?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Srikanth Koneru <
>>>>>>>>>>> tskk79 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't agree with :
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Theme A name: "SEO Keyword" = good
>>>>>>>>>>>> Theme B name "SEO Keyword by a Bunch of Other SEO Keywords
>>>>>>>>>>>> ThemeShop" = bad
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Theme A name: "SEO Keyword" = bad
>>>>>>>>>>>> Theme B name "SEO Keyword by a Bunch of Other SEO Keywords
>>>>>>>>>>>> ThemeShop" = bad bad bad bad
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Names like divi, avada, kyan, bron are fair/enforceable because
>>>>>>>>>>>> those made up names are not SEO keywords.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> All I can do is explain my point and if that is okay with
>>>>>>>>>>>> admins, then so be it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 2:15 AM, Chip Bennett <
>>>>>>>>>>>> chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Your changed example may be the "ground reality", but it is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> NOT to focus of the quoted Guideline. That's the point I'm trying to make.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> To be perfectly clear, under the current Guideline:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Theme A name: "SEO Keyword" = good
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Theme B name "SEO Keyword by a Bunch of Other SEO Keywords
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ThemeShop" = bad
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "If you want a enforceable, objective, definable and fair
>>>>>>>>>>>>> naming standards, you should simply ask us to use made up names like divi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> avada, kyan, bron"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This makes no sense, and is the exact opposite of enforceable,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> objective, definable, and fair.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Srikanth Koneru <
>>>>>>>>>>>>> tskk79 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My changed example is the ground reality, If its not within
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the purview of TRT(not sure why it isn't) I was willing to make my case
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> before WP foundation but Otto seems to speak for them so its not needed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anymore.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you want a enforceable, objective, definable and fair
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> naming standards, you should simply ask us to use made up names like divi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> avada, kyan, bron
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 1:21 AM, Chip Bennett <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You asked for clarification on the current Guideline. The
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> example I gave explains the intent of that Guideline.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Your changed example is something completely different, and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not something I believe to be within the purview of the TRT.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Take the name of my own Theme, for example: Oenology.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Now, my Theme has nothing to do with Wine, though I take
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> artistic license with it in the Theme description and motivation. Are you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suggesting that my Theme name is acceptable as-is, but if I'd made a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wine-related Theme, then it would *not* be acceptable, merely because it is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a relevant SEO keyword?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry, I just can't get behind that. It's not objective,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> definable, enforceable, or fair.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 2:12 PM, Srikanth Koneru <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tskk79 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chip,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> convert this :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Theme A name: "Some Name"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  Theme B name: "Some Name by Amazing SEO Keywords"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Theme A name: "SEO Keywords"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Theme B name: "Some Name by Amazing SEO Keywords"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In the former, why are you objecting to Theme B name?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because it has "SEO Keywords"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 12:39 AM, Emil Uzelac <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> emil at uzelac.me> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nice look + Great support + Great rating = Success in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> directory and or any other place out there.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Catchy name is worthless without this.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 2:06 PM, Srikanth Koneru <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tskk79 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is why I said theme should be at least half decent,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> success depends on how many people are actually using it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 12:32 AM, Otto <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> otto at ottodestruct.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Srikanth Koneru <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tskk79 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Otto, which search are you talking about Google or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> theme directory?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is how it works :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I make a theme, name it "Premium Photography" get it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into directory, I get a url
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> www.wordpress.org/themes/premium-photography and my
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> credit link will be <a href="
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.wordpress.org/themes/premium-photography">Premium
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Photography Theme</a>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I get downloads from directory which will get me link
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> juice, combining the link juice and wordpress.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> domain authority I am already in the top 3-7 ranks on google, give it some
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> time to get more downloads and build links and I am in top 1-3 and I now
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have a steady monthly pay check with no effort.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All you need is a half decent theme and a nice keyword,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> now if I get lucky and it gets featured, I can buy a nice car or a house.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, if you think so, then go for it. Best of luck.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> However, being that I have the actual download and usage stats, let's just
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> say that I have my doubts. :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Names don't matter that much. Your Google-fu is not as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strong as you believe it to be. WordPress.org is indeed a major player, but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we're not the only game in town, and the truth is that people look for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> themes based on screenshots and functionality. Names may get you a Google
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> search result, but they don't get a download or usage, and the fact of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> matter is that people aren't stupid.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Otto
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> 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
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140723/da05c806/attachment-0001.html>