30 ms·

That became a thing because he felt like they didn't contribute to WordPress. Like, that's the entire reason behind that (very weird imo) request for a royalty.

That became a thing because he felt like they didn't contribute to WordPress. Like, that's the entire reason behind that (very weird imo) request for a royalty. I'm not sure if it's true, but there were talks about WPEngine devs basically not being allocated any dev time on WordPress anymore (whereas Automattic devs spend tens of hours a week on the actual OSS project). That was one of the catalyst behind the whole drama where Matt called them out basically on stage during a conference talk. Which was just before (or at the same time) as he started talking about the royalty. Now, again Matt's behavior has been super weird since he basically failed at articulating his position well, and his PR has been catastrophic. But the fact is WPEngine still does not contribue to WordPress. That is their right, but everything matt has been doing is also "legal" and within his (and his company's) rights.

ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
> That became a thing because he felt like they didn't contribute to WordPress. Like, that's the entire reason behind that (very weird imo) request for a royalty. I think it's the other way around: the (false) claims about WPEngine not contributing became a thing because they refused his demands to direct 8% of their revenue into matt's private-equity-backed pockets. It would make no sense otherwise: "you aren't contributing to the community, so contribute to my for-profit corporation instead"? If matt really cared about the community*, wouldn't the appropriate demand be for WPEngine to contribute 8% to the community, instead of to matt? *: yes, I recognize that, in reality, matt's repeated actions harming the community in service of himself have made clear that he cares more about himself than the community.
- mardifoufs 2y ago
  Hmmm, so is WPengine actually contributing to WordPress? Everything I've seen seem to indicate very little development work. But maybe I'm misinformed. Also, the community (in terms of development) is basically automattic and... that's it. That's the whole problem! But again, I completely agree that the royalty request was extremely weird especially considering the supposed separation between WordPress.org & Automattic
  - ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
    > Hmmm, so is WPengine actually contributing Yes, WPEngine is contributing to the wordpress community, but that's beside the point, since WPEngine's contributions to the community only came up when WPEngine refused matt's shakedown demand to transfer money into matt's pockets. Weirder still, matt banned WPEngine from contributing to the community on wordpressdotorg, then took some of WPEngine's community contributions and claimed them as their own. > Also, the community (in terms of development) is basically automattic and... that's it. It's interesting that you felt the need to qualify "community", limiting it to "in terms of development". The community is the sum total of all users of, and contributors to, the wordpress ecosystem. Matt has harmed millions of community members with his actions, and the community is telling him to knock it off, for the good of the community.
    - mardifoufs 2y ago
      No, I think it's much more interesting that you keep focusing on the community part, as if paying some token amounts for marketing stuff (sponsoring conferences, events) is similar to pouring tons of engineering work into the product. It almost sounds like "paying in exposure".
      - ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
        I'd hardly consider ACF to be described as such, but: "paying some token that amounts for marketing stuff" according to whose descriptions of their community contributions?

ImPostingOnHN 2y ago

> That became a thing because he felt like they didn't contribute to WordPress. Like, that's the entire reason behind that (very weird imo) request for a royalty. I think it's the other way around: the (false) claims about WPEngine not contributing became a thing because they refused his demands to direct 8% of their revenue into matt's private-equity-backed pockets. It would make no sense otherwise: "you aren't contributing to the community, so contribute to my for-profit corporation instead"? If matt really cared about the community*, wouldn't the appropriate demand be for WPEngine to contribute 8% to the community, instead of to matt? *: yes, I recognize that, in reality, matt's repeated actions harming the community in service of himself have made clear that he cares more about himself than the community.

mardifoufs 2y ago
Hmmm, so is WPengine actually contributing to WordPress? Everything I've seen seem to indicate very little development work. But maybe I'm misinformed. Also, the community (in terms of development) is basically automattic and... that's it. That's the whole problem! But again, I completely agree that the royalty request was extremely weird especially considering the supposed separation between WordPress.org & Automattic
- ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
  > Hmmm, so is WPengine actually contributing Yes, WPEngine is contributing to the wordpress community, but that's beside the point, since WPEngine's contributions to the community only came up when WPEngine refused matt's shakedown demand to transfer money into matt's pockets. Weirder still, matt banned WPEngine from contributing to the community on wordpressdotorg, then took some of WPEngine's community contributions and claimed them as their own. > Also, the community (in terms of development) is basically automattic and... that's it. It's interesting that you felt the need to qualify "community", limiting it to "in terms of development". The community is the sum total of all users of, and contributors to, the wordpress ecosystem. Matt has harmed millions of community members with his actions, and the community is telling him to knock it off, for the good of the community.
  - mardifoufs 2y ago
    No, I think it's much more interesting that you keep focusing on the community part, as if paying some token amounts for marketing stuff (sponsoring conferences, events) is similar to pouring tons of engineering work into the product. It almost sounds like "paying in exposure".
    - ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
      I'd hardly consider ACF to be described as such, but: "paying some token that amounts for marketing stuff" according to whose descriptions of their community contributions?