The recent rejection of Patchstack’s sponsorship application for WordCamp Europe 2025 has ignited a significant conversation within the WordPress community about the evolving dynamics of contributions and sponsorships. Oliver Sild, CEO of Patchstack, shared an email from WordCamp Central on social media platform X, which outlined the reasons behind this decision. The email, penned by Felipe Santos, highlighted a shift in the sponsorship process from a first-come, first-served model to one that emphasizes contributions and the relationships companies maintain with the WordPress ecosystem.
Santos emphasized that sponsoring WordCamps is a privilege, and with this privilege comes increased expectations. He suggested that for Patchstack to strengthen its case for future sponsorship opportunities, it should pledge to the Five for the Future initiative, which encourages companies to contribute volunteer hours to the WordPress project. This recommendation, however, has stirred a debate about the fairness and transparency of the criteria used to evaluate potential sponsors.
Sild countered Santos’s assertion by pointing out that the sponsorship tier to which Patchstack applied still had open slots, and other companies without a Five for the Future commitment had been accepted. This inconsistency raises questions about the criteria being applied and whether they are being enforced equitably across all applicants.
The conversation surrounding this issue is not just about one company’s sponsorship rejection; it speaks to broader concerns about community engagement and contribution recognition within the WordPress ecosystem. Patchstack, a prominent player in WordPress security, has made significant contributions to the community, including the reporting of thousands of vulnerabilities and running a managed Vulnerability Disclosure Program in collaboration with the European Union. In 2023 alone, over 4,500 security vulnerabilities were reported by their community of researchers, showcasing the company’s commitment to enhancing the security of the WordPress ecosystem.
Criticism of the decision to reject Patchstack has come from various corners of the community. Notable figures such as Simon Harper and Francesca Marano expressed their disbelief that Patchstack’s contributions could be deemed insufficient. Marano, who has been involved in the community for years, lamented the lack of transparency regarding the criteria for sponsorship and the failure to publicly discuss the changes in the sponsorship process. Her concerns echo a sentiment among many that the current evaluation methods may not accurately reflect the value and contributions of companies like Patchstack.
On social media, the backlash was swift. Industry experts commented on the perceived disconnect between the WordPress community’s efforts and the criteria being applied to sponsorship applications. Matt Mullenweg, co-founder of WordPress, described the email as “crappy” and vowed to investigate further, indicating that the issue has reached the upper echelons of WordPress leadership.
The situation highlights the ongoing challenges the WordPress community faces in balancing the need for contributions with the recognition of those contributions. Critics argue that relying on vague metrics can lead to alienation of key players who have invested significant resources into the ecosystem.
Historically, WordCamp Europe has faced scrutiny over issues of diversity and representation within its speaker lineups, but this marks a new frontier of controversy regarding sponsorships. The WordCamp Europe Organizing Team has stated that they do not manage the sponsorship applications directly, placing the responsibility on WordCamp Central.
As the conversation unfolds, it remains to be seen how this incident will shape future sponsorship policies and community engagement strategies within the WordPress ecosystem. The rejection of Patchstack’s application may serve as a catalyst for re-examining the values that underpin the community and how they are reflected in sponsorship practices. The community’s response suggests a yearning for a more inclusive and transparent approach that recognizes the myriad ways in which companies contribute to the overall health and sustainability of the WordPress project.
For those involved in the WordPress ecosystem, the Patchstack case serves as a reminder of the importance of meaningful engagement and recognition in fostering a thriving, collaborative community. As this narrative continues to develop, it will be crucial for community leaders to address these concerns and work toward a shared understanding of what it means to contribute to WordPress in meaningful ways.