Response to DHH

Use of metrics (LOC, revenue) and language comparisons

• Several object to using lines of code as a measure of “doing open source,” calling it meaningless across languages and projects.
• Some note PHP and WordPress coding standards are verbose and dependency-heavy, inflating counts.
• Others criticize framing revenue size as proof of superiority, saying it sidesteps the substantive GPL/trademark issues.

Tone, ad hominem, and “respectful debate”

• Many see the blog post as predominately personal attacks (e.g., on business size, personality, wealth, car purchases) rather than engagement with arguments.
• The suggestion that the critic should seek therapy is widely viewed as out of line and hypocritical, given the author’s prior stance on speculating about mental health.
• Commenters highlight the dissonance between opening with “respectful debate” and sustaining harsh, mocking rhetoric.

GPL vs trademarks and the WP Engine dispute

• One camp sees the core conflict as GPL freedoms vs. attempts to extract a “royalty” via trademark leverage, calling this a “shadow obligation.”
• Another stresses that trademarks exist precisely to prevent market confusion; defending them is not inherently outrageous.
• A subthread examines the change in the WordPress trademark policy around “WP,” arguing that retroactively discouraging “WP” usage after years of permissiveness is legally and ethically dubious.
• There is discussion of “nominative use” of trademarks (e.g., “we host WordPress”), with some believing WP Engine is likely on solid legal ground, but this is noted as ultimately for courts to decide.

WordPress quality, ecosystem, and governance

• Multiple commenters criticize WordPress’s codebase as “spaghetti,” hard to scale, and overly dependent on heavy caching.
• The stagnation of core features and reliance on plugins like Advanced Custom Fields are cited as failures of core development direction.
• Some argue leadership has become insular, with recent release leads mostly from the same company, undermining claims of broad community governance.
• The WP Engine conflict is framed by some as demanding contributions on terms dictated by that company’s leadership.

Perception of leadership and impact on the ecosystem

• Several threads question the leader’s judgment, calling the post childish, “modern incivility,” or evidence of being “unwell.”
• Others bring up past controversies (e.g., theme copying, domain disputes, lawsuits) to argue this behavior fits a pattern.
• Some worry that a single, volatile decision-maker controlling such a large share of the web is a genuine risk; others dismiss it as “rich people arguing on the internet.”
• Many note the post was edited and ultimately deleted, reading this either as newfound self-awareness or outside pressure.

Meta: why this drama matters

• One side says the whole saga is a waste of time and low-value mudslinging.
• The other insists it’s relevant “founder risk” information when choosing WordPress or its forks as a platform.
• There is also concern about coordinated downvoting/flagging and company employees publicly defending leadership in ways that may backfire on their careers.