[theme-reviewers] Tuesday's meeting

[Tammie Lister]

Yes I am up for it. Thanks for the opportunity.

Tammie

On Wednesday, September 3, 2014, Emil Uzelac <emil at uzelac.me> wrote:

> ​Progress... ​Srikanth, Tammie, Jose, are you up for it?
>
> If so the next step would be to ask Otto to help us out (time permitting
> of course).
> Your role is to go over approved themes and mark them live.
>
> Sounds good?
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','tskk79 at gmail.com');>> wrote:
>
>> so any progress ?
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Emil Uzelac <emil at uzelac.me
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','emil at uzelac.me');>> wrote:
>>
>>> The role contains the option to mark themes live, along with what
>>> reviewer already does and is able to do.
>>>
>>> Think of it as the add-on.
>>>
>>> No need to make any restrictions or speculate conflict :)
>>>
>>> On Friday, August 29, 2014, Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com
>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','tskk79 at gmail.com');>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Not sure what conflict with WordPress.org you are talking about but the
>>>> conflict I had in mind is this :
>>>> Themeshop owner/employee has his/their themes in new/updated list and
>>>> they may delay the next push as long as possible to get as much exposure of
>>>> being on theme directory as possible, even if he is genuinely busy, others
>>>> may interpret it that way.
>>>>
>>>> So in my opinion neutral person should be first preference, just an
>>>> opinion.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 7:26 AM, Philip Arthur Moore <
>>>> philip at pressbuild.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If you find a completely neutral, unbiased, amazing theme reviewer
>>>>> good enough for WordPress.org who does not own a theme shop or make
>>>>> themes that would in any way "conflict" with WordPress.org, let me
>>>>> know. I've been looking for unicorns.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 6:53 AM, Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> > I guess stepping stone in figurative pyramid comment gave me wrong
>>>>> idea.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 5:12 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Here's my take on (and original intent for proposing) the role of
>>>>> "trusted
>>>>> >> reviewer": they are reviewers who are experienced enough, and who
>>>>> perform
>>>>> >> thorough and complete enough reviews, to be *trusted* to push
>>>>> approved
>>>>> >> themes Live - either directly (in the case of their own tickets) or
>>>>> >> indirectly (in the case of the admin review queue.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> No more, no less. Not a "path to admin", not a title or
>>>>> recognition. Just
>>>>> >> those competent to push themes live.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> It's also not a status symbol or exclusive club. As far as I'm
>>>>> concerned,
>>>>> >> it should be something available to every single reviewer.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> The whole point is to facilitate the review process while ensuring
>>>>> that
>>>>> >> themes with critical issues don't end up in end users' hands.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> On Aug 28, 2014 5:38 PM, "Jose Castaneda" <jomcastaneda at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> As some of you are aware, and even attended, our meeting on
>>>>> tuesday went
>>>>> >>> good. If you would like to read the logs:
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> https://irclogs.wordpress.org/chanlog.php?channel=wordpress-themes&day=2014-08-26&sort=asc#m106404
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> The basis of the meeting was to define the role of a key/trusted
>>>>> >>> reviewer. That person will have the ability to push themes live
>>>>> but not the
>>>>> >>> ability to assign tickets, sort of a sub-admin type of role. As
>>>>> Cais
>>>>> >>> mentioned the key things the admins are looking for are:
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> * experience
>>>>> >>> * community involvement
>>>>> >>> * high quality reviews
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> He also notes that he, and the other admins, would love more
>>>>> feedback.
>>>>> >>> Seriously, I cannot emphasize that part enough, folks. The more
>>>>> feedback we
>>>>> >>> provide the better we are as a team. It can't all be one sided. I
>>>>> know there
>>>>> >>> have been a few that speak up from time to time and some that hold
>>>>> back.
>>>>> >>> This is your time to have your voice heard and make an impact on
>>>>> not just
>>>>> >>> our team but the entire WordPress project because of this.
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> What other things do you want to add to the list of criteria?
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> >>> 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
>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org');>
>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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/20140903/ea147c93/attachment.html>