Anything not at either end of that spectrum (I'd argue Wordpress, for instance is dangerously close to being an example) is a compromise which shouldn't exist b

Anything not at either end of that spectrum (I'd argue Wordpress, for instance is dangerously close to being an example) is a compromise which shouldn't exist because it will incur a heavy maintenance burden (greater than the limited but simple solution) in exchange for it's flexibility which it might not be able to pay back as well as the fully flexible solution. Assuming content management is the key goal; I tend to use either a static generator (limited, purpose-built, ultimately simple) or Drupal (approaching becoming a framework that happens to ship with a CMS, has a learning curve from hell). For someone that needs more than the simple use case, my suggestion is to delegate to a guy who has spent a long time and cleared the hurdles to proficiency with one of the flexible-at-expense-of-complication CMSes. Though, I'm one of said guys, so I'm biased. Obviously, Drupal's not exactly pretty (and PHP is a lot of fun to hate) but I find that it comes with code I don't have to write to scratch enough of my customers' itches for me that it's hard not to love it anyway.