Matt Mullenweg deactivates WordPress accounts of contributors planning a fork
WordPress’s founding leader has deactivated the wordpress.org accounts of several long-time contributors who were calling for governance reforms and exploring mirrored plugin/theme infrastructure, portraying them as would‑be fork organizers. Commenters argue this clashes with the GPL ethos and concentrates too much power over the ecosystem’s single points of failure (core infrastructure, plugin directory, trademark), risking community trust and business confidence in a platform that underpins countless sites. While a few defend his right to protect commercial interests and trademarks, most see the episode as evidence of a toxic leadership crisis that may ultimately force a serious fork or alternative ecosystem to emerge.
Context of the Account Deactivations
- Discussion centers on the project lead deactivating several long-time contributors’ wordpress.org access after they criticized governance and suggested reforms.
- Many see this as retaliation against dissent and an escalation of an existing conflict with a major hosting company.
- Some argue the lead is within his rights as the person who drove the project for decades; others counter that open source norms make this behavior unacceptable.
Fork vs Governance Reform
- TechCrunch’s “planning a fork” framing is disputed.
- Several commenters state the group talked about governance changes and mirroring plugin/theme repositories, not forking core.
- Others note that, whether intended or not, this move makes a fork more likely and may actually boost its visibility.
Open Source, GPL, and Monetization
- Frequent reminder that the software is GPL and itself a fork of an earlier project.
- Many argue: if you choose GPL, others can commercialize and fork; being angry later is inconsistent.
- Some highlight a long-standing WordPress culture where redistributing GPL plugins is labeled “theft,” at odds with the license.
Control of Infrastructure and Trademarks
- A recurring theme is that the real power is control over wordpress.org: plugin/theme directories, branding, and trademarks.
- Commenters describe this as a single point of failure enabling actions like “hijacking” plugins or excluding critics.
- The project lead’s effective control of the trademark and foundation is seen as a conflict with the idea of community governance.
Legal and Injunction Questions
- One subthread questions whether deactivating accounts might violate a court order barring interference with a specific company’s “employees, users, customers, or partners.”
- There is disagreement over whether the affected contributors qualify as “partners” in a legal sense; overall status is described as unclear.
Community Trust, Culture, and Leadership
- Many describe the lead’s recent posts and public behavior as hostile, petty, or unstable, and say it’s damaging the project’s reputation.
- Some link this to a long-standing pattern of control and retaliation; others stress his early technical and financial contributions and warn against rewriting history.
- Several contributors report bans or deactivations for merely discussing the dispute, and mention a “culture of fear.”
Business and Ecosystem Impact
- Agencies and plugin authors express concern: clients notice the drama and question whether WordPress is “safe” to bet on.
- Some long-time users say they no longer recommend WordPress and are migrating to alternatives, though others note its ecosystem and plugin model remain hard to replace.
- A number of commenters predict a fork is inevitable but worry about the difficulty of replicating the plugin directory, migrating existing sites, and protecting plugin developers’ livelihoods.