-
Website
http://www.shootingatbubbles.com/ -
Original page
http://www.shootingatbubbles.com/2008/03/19/well-gee-i-must-be-a-liar/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
The first time I saw it was a couple of weeks ago and assumed it was a prototype. There was even an email addy given for anyone wanting to help tag the themes - I think it was shadow 12 gmail or something.
At the very least, you have to admit that given the lack of browser window visibility, and the lack of posted code or urls, it seems very suspicious. Not trying to nose into your business, but surely you can understand why someone would be apprehensive to accept this. Like I said in another comment, this seems like prime linkbait material. Not calling you a liar, but without more proof than some images that could very easily have been photoshopped, this is a hard one to believe.
I did save the source but I am having a hard time tracking it down on my drive(s) but as soon as I get over this flu that is knocking the shit outta me I'll get back on and see if I can find it again.
I understand that this might be hard to believe but as you can see from comments to this and the other related posts others have seen it as well.
As for the suggestion - vieled or otherwise - that this is link bait if that were the case then it is the weakest example of it .. I would have gotten better results by posting that Valleywags newest reporter is actually Michael Arrington in drag. :)
At 50+ years I don't think I need toplay that kind of silly game especially if I want to be able to look at myself in the mirror in the morning.
Looking at it right now it is still using the same design so if anyone wants screenshots or code I'll be happy to oblige. I think its really weird that some people can see it and others can't. I'm in Australia if it makes any difference.
My email is jylan at briterwebdesign dot com.
Thanks :) but I also have managed to get back to the same display as the ones in the screenshots as well as saved both the CSS and source files. I will be posting them shortly so everyone can finally shut up about this - although I do expect an apology for certain quarters (doubt I will get it though)
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<font size="-1"><font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">That is good
then <span class="moz-smiley-s1"><span> :-) </span></span> I really
like the new design, hopefully everyone else will be able to access it
soon.
</font></font>
</body>
</html>
Fair enough. For what it's worth, your story seems more and more reasonable the longer this goes on.
Sorry if I ended up giving you more hell than anything else. But as we have seen, even without your browser screenshots, there are a number of other people who can back up the claims who have also seen either the same or something similar on the theme repository.
Not a problem :) I ended up learning a valuable lesson in the process
If you aren't familiar with that acronym, that's the Liars, Hacks, Meanies and Doo-Doo Heads Society. I'm sure you'll start receiving our newsletter in coming weeks.
What a bizarre reaction - I just don't understand it. First, others confirmed the theme viewer. I was one of them; I was pleased that it was a great visual organization that would help me choose a new theme sometime in the next few months. When I load the URL now, it's different than it was when I left the comment on your original post. Simple as that.
With regard the linkbait implications, they're tasteless and defy both common sense and experience. As you said, it would have been the weakest attempt at linkbaiting I've seen in a long time. It also contrasts with your massive body of work on this site, none of which characterizes you as a linkbaiter.
And, really, what possible [and plausible] motivation would you have to fake it? This is one of the dumbest accusations I've come across in the blogosphere - ever.
You're due an apology. We're due an explanation for why Lloyd would bother to defame a blogger.
Others have pointed out that is an a very old version of the theme viewer, from before Automattic actively managed it, that is why it isn't in our code repository. Anyway, that is no excuse for what I wrote. You have my sincerest apology (though I wonder why there would be any other type.)