At the recent WordCamp US, a highly anticipated Q&A session with Matt Mullenweg, the co-founder of WordPress, captivated attendees with its frankness and urgency. Mullenweg opened the session with a bold declaration, indicating that this might be one of his most provocative presentations to date. He began by reading from his recent article, “WordCamp US & Ecosystem Thinking,” while jazz music set the tone for a nuanced discussion about the future of WordPress and the role of private equity in the open-source ecosystem.
Mullenweg used the concept of the “Tragedy of the Commons” to draw attention to the importance of the Five for the Future initiative, which encourages companies to contribute back to the WordPress community. His remarks took a sharp turn when he addressed his previous cryptic tweets, warning of the potential consequences of private equity firms undermining open-source communities. This warning came in the wake of his criticisms of WP Engine, a hosting service owned by Silver Lake, a private equity firm he accused of disregarding open-source principles in pursuit of profit.
Among his more striking statements, Mullenweg noted that this might be the last time WP Engine would have a booth at WordCamp. He shared that many insights he presented were relayed to him by WP Engine employees who were concerned about the firm’s lack of commitment to the WordPress community. Mullenweg emphasized that Silver Lake’s motivations are strictly financial, stating, “They don’t give a dang about your open-source ideals; they just want a return on capital.”
He backed his claims with examples of Silver Lake’s previous acquisitions, such as Talend, which they acquired in 2010 and subsequently monetized its open-source user base, achieving a staggering 20x return. Mullenweg also referenced Unity, another company they invested in, which saw significant price hikes that pushed users toward open-source alternatives like the Godot Game Engine.
In a move that shocked many, Mullenweg announced that WP Engine would no longer be welcome at future WordCamps, criticizing the company for contributing little to the Five for the Future initiative. He referred to the managing director of Silver Lake as a “schoolyard bully” and stated that WP Engine’s branding was misleading—its name and colors too closely resembling those of WordPress, which could create confusion among users.
Mullenweg acknowledged that WordPress’s growth has stagnated over the past 18 months, largely due to non-contributing companies outpacing those that actively support the community. However, he also noted a recent resurgence in momentum for WordPress, indicating it had gained substantial market share.
His commitment to the open-source ethos was clear, as he insisted that the only way to combat “bad actors” is to confront them directly. He encouraged users to consider migrating to hosting services that actively contribute to WordPress when their contracts with WP Engine expire. Mullenweg expressed his support for WP Engine employees who share their concerns about the company’s lack of participation in the community, emphasizing that the staff are not to blame for the company’s actions.
In terms of future developments, Mullenweg highlighted upcoming features for WordPress that would enhance collaboration, akin to Google Docs, and reinforced the importance of software licenses in maintaining user freedoms. He expressed pride in the adoption of WordPress by significant entities, including the U.S. Army and various government branches.
Following his presentation, Mullenweg escalated his critique by publishing an article on WordPress.org, asserting that WP Engine’s practices amounted to offering a “cheap knock-off” of WordPress. He pinpointed the company’s decision to disable revisions by default as a significant deviation from the core WordPress experience. His approach sparked a Twitter poll to gauge community sentiment about WP Engine’s presence at future WordCamps, with the majority favoring their removal.
WP Engine responded to Mullenweg’s remarks with a blog post highlighting their contributions to WordPress. They outlined their sponsorship of WordCamps and various educational initiatives but notably sidestepped addressing Mullenweg’s specific allegations.
The fallout from Mullenweg’s comments has reverberated throughout the WordPress community, eliciting mixed reactions. Some users rallied behind him, canceling their WP Engine subscriptions, while others criticized his confrontational approach. Prominent members of the community weighed in, with some advocating for stricter guidelines for WordCamp sponsorships that would require contributions to the Five for the Future initiative.
Rodolfo Melogli, founder of Business Bloomer, expressed concern about the appropriateness of Mullenweg’s public criticisms. In contrast, others supported the need for accountability among companies profiting from WordPress, emphasizing the necessity of giving back to the community.
Mullenweg’s remarks have reignited discussions about the sustainability and ethical practices of companies within the WordPress ecosystem, echoing larger concerns about the balance between monetization and community support. As the debate continues, it remains clear that Mullenweg’s commitment to maintaining the integrity of WordPress and its community will be a focal point moving forward.
This ongoing conversation about the role of corporate interests in open-source software invites a broader examination of how communities can sustain themselves while fostering innovation and inclusivity. The future of WordPress, like many open-source projects, hinges on the delicate balance between profit and principle, a tension that will likely continue to shape its trajectory in the years to come.
