I Stayed

149 pointsposted 12 hours ago
by speckx

95 Comments

sonofhans

11 hours ago

FWIW Jeffrey Zeldman is a living legend. He was one of the first print designers to transition to the web, did it well, and wrote about it constantly. He designed the “Batman Forever” website in 1995; it was visited by something like one-third of all Internet users.

He created the Web Standards Project, hugely influential in getting browser manufacturers to support standards rather than pee in the pool. And if you think cross-browser support today is rough, at the time you could reliably crash production browsers with valid CSS.

Never mind A List Apart, one of the best early mailing lists on the web, a kind of transitionary form between Usenet and forums/Discord. And A Book Apart, which published lots of high-quality stuff.

If you develop for the web today, every time a browser behaves as the spec describes, thank Jeffrey Zeldman.

rudasn

11 hours ago

Zeldman, Bowman, Molly, ppk are the ones I remember reading and learning from back in the IE6, pre-firefox days.

Legends indeed.

hardwaresofton

2 hours ago

Thank you for this — I was uninformed.

ddingus

20 minutes ago

As was I. Now off to read about these interesting people.

skybrian

10 hours ago

> I also know that the Maker-Taker problem is an issue in open source, just as I know that a friend you buy lunch for every day, and who earns as much money as you do, is supposed to return the favor now and then

Informal agreements like this work between people who know each other, not for agreements between strangers. The terms in an open source license are intended to be universally applicable, to make the obligations clear for anyone who reads them. This includes total strangers and companies that didn’t exist when you published the code.

Those strangers shouldn’t be expected to abide by anything not explicitly written down in the license. If the license doesn’t document the obligations you expect of anyone, you used the wrong license.

We should be suspicious of people who try to claim that there are additional unwritten obligations for reusing source code. Open source licenses have very generous terms, maybe too generous. They allow takers. That’s how it works, you can take it.

mlyle

5 hours ago

Nah. Or at least, not entirely. (I'm not really writing about Automattic here).

Contracts -- and law in general -- describe in detail what kinds of actions will allow another to bring legal force into play against you or vice-versa.

But there's all kinds of actions that I can legally take that don't conform to norms that will invite condemnation and reprisal through means other than the legal sphere.

Not every obligation should be given legal force; not every action that's strictly legal will turn out to be socially okay or consequence free.

jchw

an hour ago

In my opinion this is completely backwards. You should reserve all of the rights you intend to exercise. This is indeed what most companies have always done; you don't go randomly giving people copyright licenses to e.g. your characters and then get mad when they use them. Instead you just tacitly allow some unlicensed usage of your IP. That really is a social contract that exists in different places across the world.

I understand that some people didn't always understand the consequences of their choices, or maybe wrongly thought we all agreed on these unwritten social contracts, but we don't agree at all and I hope the lesson is learned well.

fragmede

3 hours ago

If you want things, you get them written into the contract. that's how business works. Eg the license for Facebook's llama model says if you have a ton of users you gotta pay up. if this were something small, like maybe give us a shout-out once in a while then hey, but we're talking substantial actual resources that shouldn't be left to implied assumptions. because if you don't actually talk about it, what I assume and what you assume is reasonable is going to be on different planets.

mlyle

2 hours ago

A license can allow something, but there can still be companies that are good citizens of the open source community of things licensed that way and other companies that are not so good.

In turn, that can affect how likely others are to view those companies favorably and/or cooperate with them.

e.g. I favor Prusa 3d printers over other vendors because Prusa provides substantial resources to development of the tooling that we all use. Other vendors are (usually) compliant with the contract, but may not be seen as good citizens by everyone in the community, and this can have consequences even if it doesn't have legal force.

marcinzm

9 hours ago

It's I think sort of clear from everything that Automattic's leadership doesn't seem to understand that running a business means you're running a business. You're not making a side project, working on a hobby or running a non-profit. You're running a for-profit business which means others will treat you as such and you can't make excuses for it.

Barrin92

an hour ago

>We should be suspicious of people who try to claim that there are additional unwritten obligations for reusing source code.

There are additional and unwritten obligations in everything, that's just what a culture is. And open source culture has always relied on a general goodwill extended to strangers, it is what keeps it alive. If we only abide by the letter of the law and take as much as we can and give as little as possible open source is just dead, I mean you already see this with large open source contributors moving towards more restrictive licenses.

Saying that the conclusion of this is that licenses were too generous and that we ought to be suspicious of people because they take the underling ethos seriously is... strange to say the least.

skywhopper

an hour ago

I would argue that the taking is the point of open source. By providing software free to use and copy and modify to the world, you’re making it a better place. You won’t be financially rewarded for that. That isn’t the point. Mongo, Redis, Elastic, HashiCorp, Automattic, and many others have forgotten that.

urban_alien

an hour ago

The continuation of this work demands defending it (and therefore the good it spread) from parasitic actors.

akoboldfrying

3 hours ago

Obviously I agree that current licenses do permit this. However: What are the long-term implications if everyone behaves this way?

They are that less open source software will be created and made available to everyone with permissive licensing. More software will be produced either commercially, or with more restrictive licensing. Less software will be produced overall, because of the overhead costs of enforcing these restrictions. The culture will shift from a norm of "Here, use this thing I made if you want!" towards "You'd better not be using this thing I made without paying me."

This formalisation of norms into explicit contracts backed by legal enforcement would not necessarily be a bad thing overall, and it may be a necessary thing in a "society" where there are too many people for everyone to know everyone else personally and establish trust that way. But it will be different. There will be winners and losers.

twelve40

3 hours ago

Everyone does behave this way. For any popular open-source project (e.g., Linux), the absolute vast majority does not contribute, just uses or makes money off of it. How can you shame someone into starting to contribute? There are people who like to contribute, there are other people who like to make a quick buck using someone else's work, and nothing else, and always will be. Unclear how to magically change the latter if the legal means fail.

skywhopper

an hour ago

This is silly. Open source doesn't require getting paid. In fact, that people have figured out how to make open source turn them into billionaires is a problem. And a good sign that the market is broken. Get those people out of open source. Linux, Kubernetes, Apache, Python, and more are doing just fine. Companies should find ways to build things together rather than trying to abuse open source to pay off VCs who are the real takers in the software industry.

madeofpalk

11 hours ago

I have a tough time relating to "[believing] in the work we do" at a for-profit company, especially one that just makes blogs. I work at a somewhat similar commercial open source company, I really enjoy my job, and I adore my direct collegues, but I've thought a lot over the past few years that if in a similar position I would almost definitely take the offer.

A job you like where ~10% of your colleges leave is a job I would probably enjoy a whole lot less.

twelve40

3 hours ago

I believe in the work they do. The web would be much sadder without standalone blogs and websites, they mostly power the diverse smaller outfits. Hate to see the entire world gobbled up and milked dry by some single-digit combo of youtube, insta, x, whatever.

threatofrain

2 hours ago

IMO the next generation of website tools are coming along in the form of drag-and-drop premade widgets and integrations to YouTube, Instagram, Twitter, etc. Almost all of WP value isn't composed of indie blogs and websites, almost all the value comes from business websites. If indie blogs and websites die it won't be because of WP because there will be other tools. Indie content of the WP variety is dying organically, or at the least the rising tide does not lift all boats.

And if indie content creation moves to TikTok that's because it's what the next generation wants.

twelve40

7 minutes ago

> value comes from business websites

I don't see a reason to exclude those from my earlier comment at all. Yes, they are very much a part of the deal too, whether ecom or whatever business they are in. Having independent "wp shopping carts" replaced by generic Prime dropshipping with both sides at the mercy of a monopolist would also be very sad. If there are people dedicated to improving the standalone alternative software and sustaining those efforts by making money off of it, i view it as a 100% positive.

s1artibartfast

11 hours ago

Thats an interesting sentiment to me. I dont have much trouble believing in the work, even in for-profit companies. For me, it is about the end product, and if it makes the world a better place or not. If it is net positive, than the work (as a whole), is meaningful. Everything beyond that is just degrees of efficiency.

I conceptually like non-profits, but that seems tangential. Why would I discount my work due to comparison with a hypothetical alternative that is more efficient at doing good.

>especially one that just makes blogs

What's wrong with blogs? I like blogs.

madeofpalk

8 hours ago

Nothing wrong with blogs, but I think it’s useful just to be real what it is we’re doing. I don’t think there’s a moral obligation or a unique social benefit to creating WordPress.

You can enjoy your job, and I do too, but I don’t claim to be doing anything extraordinary.

s1artibartfast

6 hours ago

Oh, I agree. I just don't think believing in the work requires it to be extraordinary or ground breaking. For example, you can believe that growing potatoes is beneficial work.

Of course, as stated, "believe in the work" is an imprecise sentiment. Believe what exactly? They probably don't believe it is bad tho, haha

tonyedgecombe

10 hours ago

>I dont have much trouble believing in the work, even in for-profit companies.

One of the things I liked about selling software is the knowledge that customers do value your software. If they didn't then they wouldn't put their hand in their pocket.

s1artibartfast

9 hours ago

I feel the same way about drug making. Customers might wish new drugs were cheaper, but they are free to with cheaper options or generics. Meanwhile, today's blockbuster will be tomorrow's generic, and progressively more lives are saved.

mattmaroon

8 hours ago

That may be true when we’re talking about investing in new drugs, but a whole lot of the pharmaceutical industry engages in rent-seeking behavior, and people are often not deep thinkers so their natural inclination is to just throw the baby out with the bath water.

s1artibartfast

6 hours ago

The rent seeking is pretty negligible when you zoom out in time. It is extremely hard to find a specific medication that is still on patent 20 years after approval.

I think people are generally confused by things like insulin, where there are newer and better versions coming out continually, despite it being invented in the 1920s.

justin_oaks

5 hours ago

So how does a diabetic get one of the older, worse insulins that they can afford? Certainly that's preferable to the better insulin that they can't afford.

s1artibartfast

3 hours ago

You buy it at Walmart.

At Walmart it is $25 for 1,000 Units of Novolin N [1], with no insurance or prescription. 1000 units is about a month for a lot of people. Novolin N is a third or 4th generation Insulin approved in 1950.

You can get 1000 units of Humalog (Approved in 1996) for $43 at walgreens or most pharmacies (or 19.99 with a Walgreens coupon) [2]

The more recently approved version of Insulin Afrezza, (approved in 2014) costs about $2,000 for a monthly supply.[3]

There has been a fairly consistent march of insulin improvements since the first versions were sold in 1926. [0]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insulin_(medication)#History

https://www.walmart.com/cp/relion-insulin/8418641?action=Sig...

https://www.goodrx.com/insulin-lispro

https://pharmacy.amazon.com/afrezza-180-Cartridge-Pack-Insul...

autarch

9 hours ago

> if it makes the world a better place or not.

This seems like a pretty big "if". Arguably, Automattic is better than most for-profit companies since they develop a FOSS product, and I think you can make an argument that any sort of FOSS makes the world better.

OTOH, it's not clear to me that making it easier and cheaper to blog or host websites makes the world better. I'm sure there's lots of people using WordPress and similar products for horrible things, like tobacco companies, arms manufacturers, animal ag companies, etc. And that's not to mention the no doubt plenty of personal users who are blogging about conspiracy theories, white supremacy, or Hindu nationalism.

I think the best case for most software is that it's net _neutral_. I work at a database company. Our products are used by many, many different companies, non-profits, and governments. I think some of our customers are horrible, some are great, and most are neither. But that would be the case for me at nearly every software company I might work at.

d0gsg0w00f

2 hours ago

These casual calls for censorship are really dangerous. Every idea that we take for granted today started as something that was justifiably censorable for the social standards of the time (civil rights, women's voting rights, etc).

If Billy Bob wants to out himself as a white nationalist, I'd rather he do it out in the open. If it's really a terrible idea then it won't get any traction.

When you censor these people it gives them even more reason to get angry and people start supporting just to fight the perceived injustice. This was a key driver in Jan 6th.

s1artibartfast

8 hours ago

I don't think the plan that software is not neutral is any more supportive than it is good or bad. If anything, neutrality seems extremely unlikely because if you were to total all of the impacts, it seems exceedingly unlikely that they would perfectly sum up to zero.

That said, you are right in that these judgments certainly depends on your mental model of the world. Ex. Are blogs and websites good or bad. A proponent of radical back to the trees movement would probably disagree. I tend to think logs are a good thing for the world

mattmaroon

8 hours ago

There’s a lot of anti-capitalist brainwashing these days that exists to make you just feel guilty about the social/environmental effects of everything that isn’t free.

Being relatively far-left, much of the tech industry is indoctrinated into it.

It seems to them like a not-unintelligent, non-controversial, or even obvious viewpoint because they’ve been swimming in that water their whole lives. It’s a first principle to them and they don’t even know it.

vunderba

11 hours ago

100% agreed - given that they published this under their own name though, I wonder how much of that was just echoing the corporate mission statement of Automattic for the sake of any colleagues who happen to stumble across the blog.

flutas

9 hours ago

> I wonder how much of that was just echoing the corporate mission statement of Automattic for the sake of any colleagues who happen to stumble across the blog.

It's fairly obvious that's what it is.

Or they are being forced to post "I stayed", as nearly everyone that I've come across that works there is posting it. To the point where it doesn't even feel organic.

For anyone else that wants the latest drama: Matt seems to be weaponizing Automattic and CVE's against WP Engine now.

https://x.com/automattic/status/1842612123488473341

Kye

6 hours ago

Post deleted. What did it say?

flutas

5 hours ago

The Tweets original content was[0]:

> Automattic's security team has responsibly disclosed a vulnerability in @wp_acf to @wpengine. As is standard, they have 30 days to issue a fix before public disclosure. We have reserved this CVE for the issue: https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2024-9529

Basically announcing to the world that there is a CVE in a very widely used ("2MM+ sites") WP plugin, that also can't be patched as they banned the developers accounts from updating said plugin[1].

[0]: https://imgur.com/a/wf73amz

[1]: https://wordpress.org/news/2024/09/wp-engine-banned/

paulryanrogers

3 hours ago

Perhaps Automattic's goal is to force WPEngine to host their plugin(s) elsewhere? And also force WPEngine to have their own plugin cache or plugin market? Or at least no longer rely on WordPress.org's plugin repo directly.

flutas

3 hours ago

WPEngine has already done both of those.

Literally at this point the only customers this is hurting are standard WordPress users not on WPEngine.

saghm

10 hours ago

I was a bit dubious about this point of view before reading the full post, but wow, the last couple paragraphs lay it on thick. Suing someone for using your open source product in their own product takes "courage"? Comparing the work of developing Wordpress to Rodney King? I want to give the author the benefit of the doubt, and maybe I'm too cynical, but this sounds even more corporate-y than a lot of stuff I've read on company-hosted blogs.

s1artibartfast

10 hours ago

I don't think there was a comparison between WordPress and Rodney King. If so, what is the comparison being claimed. Is WordPress the cops? The one saying can't we get along?

The way I read it at least, it was a simple reference and sentiment, not a comparison.

saghm

5 hours ago

Fair enough. It still feels shoehorned in to me though, almost like an essay in school students are told to include a quote in their conclusion (something that happened in my English class at least once from what I can remember), which just adds to the vibe of this being "homework" to support their employer rather than coming across as authentic.

radley

9 hours ago

> especially one that just makes blogs

Uhm, that's pretty reductive. Perhaps that's the difference?

rendaw

11 hours ago

It's a nice sentiment, but are you helping people by granting the wishes of an unshackled combative owner? Could you take the money and help people more by working for a company with more careful leadership? Wordpress isn't the only CMS out there...

cobertos

11 hours ago

Is it really that easy to just leave and find a company/work you vibe with? It seems just as hard as trying to find a quality partner

vouaobrasil

5 hours ago

Come on, pretty much all work is hurting the world now by furthering unsustainable capitalism. I have yet to find a job that truly helps people in the tech line of work.

tolerance

11 hours ago

His evocation of the assault on Rodney King and the L.A. Riots is perplexing.

PaulDavisThe1st

11 hours ago

For those of us of a certain age, the phrase "can't we all just get along" connects quite naturally to Rodney King. So if you heard it, or for some other reason wanted to use it in a written piece ...

tolerance

10 hours ago

I don't know what you're trying to imply. Rodney King was beaten and shocked by four police officers, 63 people died and approximately $1 billion of damages resulted from the Riots. Zeldman's grief is understandable to the extent that one can emphasize with the internal conflict of choosing to remain employed by a company that is under scrutiny by people in your professional/personal community and ran by a man who is proving to be rather unpredictable.

There's likely more to Zeldman's personal struggles with respect to his health and other financial concerns than what he discloses (rightfully so). But at the same time, evoking the rhetoric of King during the Riots is indeed perplexing when measured against what Zeldman does speak about more openly: his commitment to the open web in light of the aforementioned drama. In this regard, as the kids say, "It's not that deep".

Edit: +++ "in light of the aforementioned drama"

projektfu

7 hours ago

I think it's to say that, in the face of his beating and the aftermath, King said, "can't we all just get along?" instead of calling for the heads of the cops, the mayor, or whoever else he might have considered blameworthy.

Gimpei

11 hours ago

I was going to say this too. I’m guessing PR didn’t get to vet this post.

stogot

2 hours ago

A Book Apart (the publishing company) closed?! When did this happen? The article linked doesn’t mention a date. So sad I had wanted to use them to publish a book eventually.

I wonder what happened

ChrisMarshallNY

2 hours ago

I suspect that the current fashion for JavaScript-driven mega-sites, as well as most CMSes, is what happened.

His whole Web design system was based on a hand-coded methodology that made standard HTML/CSS sites work optimally.

That doesn't really scale too well, into the current world.

I was unaware that the company (and conferences) closed. I am sad to hear about his medical issues. They can really clobber you.

qingcharles

an hour ago

Wow, I didn't know this either. I loved their titles. That's a hard business to be in, in 2024.

jzb

11 hours ago

I hope the decision works out for him. Six months salary is really only a big bag of cash if 1) you have a decent salary, and 2) you can be confident of landing a job of equal or better salary within the six-month window. Otherwise you're just going to burn through it. Given the way hiring has been in the tech world of late, it's easy to imagine it taking six months or more to get a decent job -- you can easily spend several months interviewing to have a role disappear.

FWIW I'd have to be pretty pissed and/or have no confidence in the direction of the company & its leadership and/or have another job/work lined up already to jump ship on a few days' notice like that.

peteforde

10 hours ago

Zeldman would have zero trouble getting hired anywhere tomorrow if he indicated that he was available.

This isn't the case for most people, but he is anything but most people.

butterfly42069

11 hours ago

Believing in the work the author was/is doing is one thing, but I can't help but wonder if/how they still believe in their boss.

hitekker

11 hours ago

The "We're hiring" link shows the first position offered is a "Happiness Engineer", https://i.imgur.com/zSVeuYq.png.

> Our software and services aim to provide a seamless experience, but when things don’t go as planned, our customers rely on us for help. Happiness Engineers are the frontline heroes ensuring we deliver the best experience for our users. Their role is crucial because they interact with our customers the most and make the biggest impression in their time of need.

vunderba

11 hours ago

As if the title of engineer couldn't get any more diluted. Reminds me of how everyone now is a "specialist".

Call Flow Optimization Specialist - Works at the front desk answering the telephone

dqv

10 hours ago

Yeah, it's a cutesy title for customer support because you can't take yourself too seriously in jobs like this. Put very simply, people are fucking ass holes (and yes - you have to acknowledge this to excel at being a "Happiness Engineer" - it's not cynical to recognize that people have angry outbursts, because you have to know how to calm them down; pretending that people aren't mean is a one-way ticket to burnout). Even "nice" people can be ass holes; humans are complex and represent a whole spectrum of emotions [0]. Sometimes they don't know they're doing it, sometimes they do. There are social differences (what someone on the West Coast thinks is rude is not the same as what someone on the East Coast thinks is rude, and there are even difference between "microcultures" on the rules of social engagement; these rules might be intersubjective, but differ) that have to be negotiated often in one-time ephemeral interactions. Negativity is contagious and I cringe at the times that I unnecessarily injected negativity into an interaction where the other person/people didn't do anything to deserve it.

I think there is maybe one other "weird" job title in that list, but otherwise they're all pretty normal, so this is probably one of the last things I'd criticize Automattic for. The fact that they describe customer support as "Happiness Engineering" suggests the nature of the title - we have to be a little goofy to help people.

As a final note, for anyone thinking "I work in customer support and I don't like this yada yada", it's just not for you, and that's OK. No need to think up a huge rebuttal, it's just a different philosophy for those of us who like to help people and have a little bit of fun at the same time.

I don't work at Automattic, but I like WordPress and don't really care too much about this drama.

[0]: https://feelingswheel.com/

talldayo

11 hours ago

George Orwell is kicking himself for not thinking up that name first.

wojciii

10 hours ago

Someone should rewrite "1984" as it would work with todays technologies..

outrun86

10 hours ago

It is, in fact, being written. It’s called the modern West.

robin_reala

7 hours ago

We’re more Brave New World than 1984.

sbuk

an hour ago

Absolutely. The problem here is that people that generally parrot the “1984” meme haven’t read the book, let alone read any Orwell, or Huxley for that matter.

nycticorax

7 hours ago

I am just reading about this whole Automattic vs WP Engine fight today, and I'm a little surprised that most people seem to think Automattic is the unambiguous bad guy. Automattic has still given away a huge amount of open-source software away over the years. WP Engine seems like it is entirely a mercenary operation. (Which there's nothing wrong with, per se. But it doesn't exactly warm the cockles of my heart.)

And paying people to leave if they don't agree with what the company is doing seems like a win-win.

lolinder

6 hours ago

> Automattic is the unambiguous bad guy.

I wouldn't say that's what people are saying. I've been a vocal critic of Matt's actions in these threads, and my perspective is basically this:

WP Engine may be exactly as bad as Matt says it is. They may be contributing too little and taking too much. I've seen enough of corporations to believe that that can happen.

None of that matters any more after Matt's actions in September. WP Engine has put forward convincing evidence that Matt attempted to extort them into paying tens of millions per year to Matt's for profit under threat of launching a smear campaign. Matt then demonstrated that the boundaries between Automattic (the for profit) and the open source project don't exist by locking millions of WordPress users out of the plugin ecosystem over this dispute with the for profit.

That plugin ecosystem is the WordPress project. By messing about with that ecosystem Matt showed that he is both able and willing to singlehandedly screw over anyone who uses WordPress because he has a dispute with their hosting provider.

That's the issue now. I don't see WP Engine as white knights fighting a villain, but Matt turned what could have been a united effort to improve the WordPress ecosystem into a battle between greedy corporations and it's Matt who showed that he doesn't care who gets caught in the crossfire. The issue isn't that Automattic is the unambiguous bad guy in this suit, it's that Matt has demonstrated he has more power than he can be trusted with.

Aeolun

an hour ago

> WP Engine has put forward convincing evidence that Matt attempted to extort them into paying tens of millions per year

I think it was Automattic that put forth that evidence? The literally posted the extortion letter on their blog, aiming to prove it wasn’t extortion at all.

lolinder

an hour ago

Yeah, that also happened...

I'm referring to the cease and desist [0] and the subsequent complaint. They have texts from Matt all the way up until he's about to step on stage that appear to show him threatening to launch an enormous smear campaign against them starting with his speech if they don't agree. Just two examples:

> I have 14 slides so far, working title for the talk: "How Private Equity can Hollow out and Destroy Open Source Communities, a Story in 4 Parts."

> I've got quotes from current and former employees, some may even stand up and speak as well.

And then, with a photo of the audience taken from on stage:

> I'm literally waiting for them to finish the raffle so my talk can start, I can make it just a Q&A about WordPress very easily

Matt's gone very public (some have suggested too public) with this lawsuit, but he hasn't provided any context that would make these texts look any better.

[0] https://wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Cease-and-De...

paulryanrogers

3 hours ago

Did WPEngine maintain their own cache to lessen the load on WordPress.org's plugin repo? If not then that could be a significant cost, which a large hosting provider should cache to minimize their upstream footprint and improve the UX of their own customers.

That said, it seems a modest trademark dispute has gotten way out of hand.

lolinder

3 hours ago

Yeah, I'm really no longer interested in what WP Engine could or should have been doing. Matt's been trying really hard to distract everyone from the simple fact that he personally has a kill switch that can stop the flow of security updates to millions of WordPress sites and that he will use it.

We host mirrors of NPM for many reasons, but fear that Microsoft will one day bar AWS customers from using the main registry isn't one of them.

Matt doesn't get to use that button and stay a trusted component of anyone's supply chain.

aithrowawaycomm

3 hours ago

It is a complex story and "unambiguous bad guy," probably not. But if you had to draw sides... well, in most fairy tales the Good Guys don't try to extort and blackmail the Bad Guys with personal threats aimed directly at their livelihood:

> The filing also includes a purported job offer from Mullenweg to WP Engine CEO Heather Brunner saying that if she declines to join Automattic, he’d tell the CEO of Silver Lake — the private equity firm that owns WP Engine. WP Engine referred us to the lawsuit when asked for comment.

(via https://www.theverge.com/2024/10/4/24262232/matt-mullenweg-w...)

throw16180339

4 hours ago

Automattic previously prevented 1.5 million sites from receiving security updates.

Their latest move (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41751776) is announcing a security hole in ACF, a WP Engine plugin, and preventing them from deploying a fix for it. This places 2+ million users at risk.

Good guys wouldn't do either of these things. The sooner Matt is replaced or Automattic goes under the better.

Kye

10 hours ago

It will be hard to do that work from within an embattled organization that's only in that situation because of the CEO's behavior. Things don't get better from here. Any good-faith assumptions people made before are just gone. Every action has new layers of scrutiny, every move becomes suspect.

forrestthewoods

5 hours ago

Why does someone who works at Automattic have meaningful medical debt? That's awful. I would expect Automattic to have both good insurance and sufficient pay such that no employee suffers from medical debt.

aithrowawaycomm

3 hours ago

As critical as I am of Mullenweg, I am sure Automattic is obeying the Affordable Care Act and giving employees health insurance. It would be a dumb thing to save money on when you're paying competitive wages!

This seemed like an adequate explanation without needing any details:

> incurred by the closing of my conference and publishing businesses.

forrestthewoods

an hour ago

It's not clear to me why "closing of my conference and publishing businesses" results in medical expenses.

I'm not questioning it! I just don't understand the mechanics.

breck

an hour ago

>... owning your own content

This is retarded.

You literally cannot come up with a logical definition of "owning content" without what you are realing saying being "owning other people". Copyright is slavery.

You can own a notebook. You can own a pen. You can write your ideas in that notebook and keep them secret.

But as soon as you share them with the world, you cannot "own the ideas" unless what you mean is you have ownership rights over other people.

Copyright is slavery.

pastaguy1

11 hours ago

What's the background on doing a soft layoff (or w/e) and hiring at the same time? Many of us have seen one of these close-up, just wondering what the case is here.

f3z0

11 hours ago

It’s an alignment layoff “I’m an asshole and if you aren't on board GTFO”. It’s right out of Musk’s playbook. Although I think Musk does it better.

threetonesun

11 hours ago

Musk is an ideological asshole, this is Matt recognizing further growth probably requires pushing WP Engine out of their market. If you disagree with him on this, you probably disagree where Automattic as a whole is going.

mplewis

11 hours ago

Why? This is someone else’s fight. Do you have a high amount of equity in Automattic?

You have to look out for number one.

throw16180339

3 hours ago

"It's not the rats who first abandon a sinking ship. It's the crew members who know how to swim." - Antonio Garcia Martinez, Chaos Monkeys: Obscene Fortune and Random Failure in Silicon Valley

causality0

3 hours ago

My insight into corporate legal disputes is as meaningful as my opinion on Quantum Mechanics.

What an immensely cowardly statement. Zeldman is not some naive worker elf and pretending to be such as an excuse to avoid saying anything is contemptible. If you don't want people to know what you think, just say that, or say nothing. Pretending you don't have an opinion because you don't understand is just...ick.

triyambakam

11 hours ago

> I already miss them, and most only quit yesterday. I feel their departure as a personal loss, and my grief is real. The sadness is like a cold fog on a dark, wet night.

I can't understand this. I do not view my coworkers as part of my personal life, so while I enjoy working with some, I wouldn't say I'm sad if they leave. This sounds unhealthy

MiscIdeaMaker99

10 hours ago

LOL

When you spend 8 hours a day around folks and become friends with them, it's natural to miss them when they leave. It's OK if you don't have any meaningful relationships with your co-workers, but, to me, that sounds unhealthy.

anon7000

4 hours ago

I worked at Automattic and the connections you could develop with your coworkers were fantastic. Almost everyone was kind, helpful, and encouraging, and I did my best to bring a positive attitude every day. Nearly everything being written communication makes that easier! (Eg you won’t seem standoffish one day if external circumstances have you in a poor mood.)

While you aren’t seeing people every day (the company is distributed), the relatively frequent meetups in cool places are a massive highlight, and just make your relationships that much stronger.

There are a lot of folks who have been around for ages — even if you aren’t working with someone directly anymore, you’ll frequently see a familiar face (and helping hand!) on the other side of the company.

So the grief of leaving these relationships is acute, especially if you’ve been around for a while. Processing that grief is healthy — and I might suggest that not having any kind of relationship with your coworkers is unhealthy. Or at least speaks to a cold culture somewhere.

peteforde

10 hours ago

Why are you spending your finite life working with people who you wouldn't fight for?

This might not be a "them" problem.

I'm not advocating that your coworkers have to be at the same rung as your family or [in-group X] but it's weird/sad to many reading this that you're okay not caring about the people you spend your days working towards a common goal with.

syndicatedjelly

10 hours ago

Is it possible for you to understand why others might feel this way about their colleagues and work?