undefined | Better HN

0 pointschiefalchemist1y ago0 comments

You don't see the non-premium version of ACF as contributing? I'm curious, why not?

WPE has other employees dedicated to WP and The Community. I'm not defending WPE but just because they don't contribute in a way MM wants doesn't mean they don't contribute. Suggesting they're not contributing is disingenuous.

Matt is not a dictator. Oh wait, scratch that.

p.s. Matt should be careful what he wishes for. If WPE or anyone contributes they're going to want a voice, a seat at the table. Is Matt willing to share control? If the answer is no, then that is the root problem here.

0 comments

shprd1y ago

> Suggesting they're not contributing is disingenuous.

Where did I say they don't contribute? I said they don't contribute beyond their mouth

> You don't see the non-premium version of ACF as contributing?

It's a marketing strategy, first and foremost. If they didn't offer it, an alternative would come along and attract the crowd.

You know what's disingenuous? Claiming it's a contribution when you're doing it as marketing strategy or as part of sales funnel.

You can't cash a check twice.

mtndew4brkfst1y ago

So if I go successfully make a feature addition to ie Kubernetes, or the Linux kernel, and it is exclusively motivated by furthering my business needs instead of altruism, but happens to incidentally benefit others too - do you consider that a "contribution" under your mental model? If not, what's the distinction?

shprd1y ago

> make a feature addition to ie Kubernetes, or the Linux kernel

In your example, you're contributing to other people projects so yes it would be contribution right of the bat. That's completely different than the case with ACF.

1 more reply

chiefalchemistOP1y ago

> It's a marketing strategy

And what makes Automattic's contributions any different? They "steer" the product to their benefit and sell that as what's good for them is good for all.

That's rubbish.

It's not contributing to "the cause" when the features you add are solely for your own benefit. Not that self-serving is wrong. But to sell it as benevolent red lines any decent bullshit detector.

Matt defined the license. Now he regrets that and he wants a cut. Nuttin wrong with that. But to sell it otherwise is shite. We're not that stupid.

shprd1y ago

> And what makes Automattic's contributions any different?

Well, unlike WPEngine, Automattic and Matt make significant contribution beyond their ecosystem, here are some:

- Let's encrypt: https://letsencrypt.org/sponsors/

- Matrix's open protocol: https://matrix.org/

- The PHP Foundation: https://thephp.foundation/

- Open Source Initiative: https://opensource.org/

- And the list goes on: contributing and sponsoring many projects and developers that everyone using the web benefited from, including you and billions of people (not counting wordpress's impact)

Please educate yourself before spreading FUD about people who made great contributions constantly to the open web, the entire industry, and promoted open source on every chance they got.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

shprd1y ago

> Suggesting they're not contributing is disingenuous.

Where did I say they don't contribute? I said they don't contribute beyond their mouth

> You don't see the non-premium version of ACF as contributing?

It's a marketing strategy, first and foremost. If they didn't offer it, an alternative would come along and attract the crowd.

You know what's disingenuous? Claiming it's a contribution when you're doing it as marketing strategy or as part of sales funnel.

You can't cash a check twice.

mtndew4brkfst1y ago

shprd1y ago

> make a feature addition to ie Kubernetes, or the Linux kernel

In your example, you're contributing to other people projects so yes it would be contribution right of the bat. That's completely different than the case with ACF.

1 more reply

chiefalchemistOP1y ago

> It's a marketing strategy

And what makes Automattic's contributions any different? They "steer" the product to their benefit and sell that as what's good for them is good for all.

That's rubbish.

It's not contributing to "the cause" when the features you add are solely for your own benefit. Not that self-serving is wrong. But to sell it as benevolent red lines any decent bullshit detector.

Matt defined the license. Now he regrets that and he wants a cut. Nuttin wrong with that. But to sell it otherwise is shite. We're not that stupid.

shprd1y ago

> And what makes Automattic's contributions any different?

Well, unlike WPEngine, Automattic and Matt make significant contribution beyond their ecosystem, here are some:

- Let's encrypt: https://letsencrypt.org/sponsors/

- Matrix's open protocol: https://matrix.org/

- The PHP Foundation: https://thephp.foundation/

- Open Source Initiative: https://opensource.org/

- And the list goes on: contributing and sponsoring many projects and developers that everyone using the web benefited from, including you and billions of people (not counting wordpress's impact)

Please educate yourself before spreading FUD about people who made great contributions constantly to the open web, the entire industry, and promoted open source on every chance they got.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse