Automattic has a new board after failed attempt to put CEO on leave
Automattic, the company behind WordPress, briefly saw its CEO placed on leave by the board before he used his 84% voting control to fire the board and reinstall himself, raising sharp questions about the point of corporate governance when founders hold near-absolute power. Commenters debate whether the board’s failed move — including generous severance arrangements for some executives — was a good-faith attempt to fulfill fiduciary duties or a self-serving “golden parachute” gambit. The turmoil is also prompting renewed skepticism about WordPress’s long‑term health, the ethics of its leadership, and the risks of building on platforms tightly controlled by a single individual.
Board coup vs majority-control CEO
- Many point out the CEO reportedly holds ~84% of voting shares, making any attempt to sideline them effectively doomed.
- Debate over whether the board’s attempt to put the CEO on leave was fulfilling fiduciary duty (trying to protect the company) or near-malfeasance (knowingly creating chaos with no chance of success).
- Some argue the board should have resigned and let minority shareholders sue if they believed the CEO was unfit; others say fiduciary duty required them to at least attempt removal rather than walk away.
- There is extended discussion of Delaware law: boards represent all shareholders, must act for the company’s long-term good, and cannot simply “obey” a majority shareholder if asked to do something unreasonable—yet majority holders have broad latitude and can replace boards.
- Several commenters question the point of a board when a founder has majority voting power and can reverse any decision.
Severance / “golden parachute” controversy
- Much criticism centers on generous severance packages arranged during the brief interim, described by some as “bizarre self-dealing” and potential breach of fiduciary duty.
- Others suggest these packages might have been:
- A rational risk premium for taking on high personal risk,
- Or even a “poison pill” designed to make firing them costly and thus deter removal.
- It’s unclear from the thread exactly who authorized which severance deals and how defensible they are legally.
Governance, foundations, and ethics
- Multiple comments describe a long history of blurred lines among the commercial company, the open-source project site, and a related foundation.
- Some allege opaque arrangements, including special commercial rights for the company and aggressive behavior toward competing WordPress hosts; others see the CEO as defending an open-source business against “parasitic” competitors.
- There are sharp disagreements about the CEO’s ethics and mental fitness; some describe patterns of control and self-glorification, others praise the “power move” of reasserting control.
Impact on WordPress and users
- Several commenters now avoid recommending WordPress, calling it bloated, insecure, and politically toxic.
- Others note that most users:
- Don’t know or care about Automattic’s internal drama,
- Value WordPress for its plugins, hosting ubiquity, WYSIWYG editing, WooCommerce, and predictable flat pricing.
- Some believe AI-assisted custom builds and static-site approaches will erode WordPress’s dominance; others argue its turnkey nature, ecosystem, and low non-technical barrier keep it entrenched.