Matt Mullenweg likes playing the victim. But in reality, he’s using his perceived victimhood to evade the key question over sponsored themes:
Wouldn’t it be better to establish a *quality* criterion as opposed to a *sponsorship* criterion?
Another way of putting it is this:
Aren’t PressRow and Cutline damned good WordPress themes that have benefited the WordPress community?
Instead of answering these questions straight-up, I expect that Matt (and his WP fanboys) will continue to take the following copouts:
1. Cry victim and ignore this legitimate criticism
2. Claim “significant financial interests in seeing sponsored themes continue”
The fact is that both of these responses are irrational. Arguments can be sound regardless of who makes them. I’ve made an argument that you might refer to as reductio ad absurdem: the new policy has the brittle effect of wiping out great themes like Cutline and PressRow. That’s an undesirable effect. There must be some middle ground.
But no. We’ll throw the baby out with the bath water. And we’ll cry victim while we’re at it (and delete reasonable comments that make us look bad;-)