Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed.
But that's a weird thing to do. Why advise people to do stuff detrimental to the world?
Trying to help people be better versions of themselves is a good thing.
WPEngine, Inc. vs. Automattic– Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction
131–140 of 212 posts
Re: WPEngine, Inc. vs. Automattic– Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction
#132Rooted in speculation about why this meltdown occurred in the first place: be very careful about taking money, as well as the amount and who from. My guess from day one is that Matt was put under pressure from investors and this was the only "fix" he saw. A real shame to see such a great legacy flushed for zero ROI.
I dunno, I mean he could have applied the "fix" in a more cold and calculated method. Tons of PE companies out here doing the same and squeezing the stone without resorting to random personal attacks of those they disagreed with. Everything just had this air of pettiness to it instead.
The difference between an MBA and a hacker who lucked into a profitable business.
Re: WPEngine, Inc. vs. Automattic– Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction
#133I hope Matt considers placing all the community resources of Wordpress into the foundation, including Wordpress.org, constituting an actual board, contributing funds, and setting up a governance and contribution system that matches the open ethos of the license and community. I think this is an area that Drupal gets right, and Dries wrote an interesting post about it in October: https://dri.es/solving-the-maker-taker…
Advocating, in other words, the creation of a sort of Automattic for the People
Bravo. I haven’t listened to that record for ages. Thank you!
Re: WPEngine, Inc. vs. Automattic– Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Yeah, they even showed they knew what the person meant. They were curious about why the person chose that particular word as it’s occurred frequently enough to make them wonder how/why it happens. If you know the answer I’d be happy to hear it.
Not the asker, but I have the same curiosity, as this phenomenon does not seem to occur with other words in English. I suspect it has something to do with "lose" being the only English word with the "oo" vowel followed by an "s", but I find it fascinating that this mistake can occur. And almost exclusively it is made by native English speakers.
Re: WPEngine, Inc. vs. Automattic– Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction
#135It feels as if Automattic doesn't do a complete paradigm shift and become truly open with their software everyone is going to give up on them entirely - at least everyone with significant talent and investment.
I agree with you that Automattic needs a paradigm shift (massive leadership change, probably), but I don’t think the openness of their software is the problem. Just because they have a huge number of OSS projects. Most of it is open source, even things that really don’t see 3rd party contributions (like https://github.com/Automattic/vip-go-mu-plugins , https://github.com/Automattic/wp-calypso , https://github.com/Aut…
[deleted]
Re: WPEngine, Inc. vs. Automattic– Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction
#136> Here, Mullenweg’s “statement that he had the right to disable WPEngine’s account access and to make changes to the ACF plugin for the sake of public safety[,]” see Opp. at 27-28, is belied by the declarations of WPEngine’s executives stating that the claimed vulnerability was minor [...] @photomatt literally screwed himself over by talking about his actions here, when everyone was screaming at him to shut the fuck…
Here's the HN thread that's an exhibit in this court filing (screenshot on page 24), https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41821336#41821399 ( "Secure Custom Fields by WordPress.org (wordpress.org)" )
[deleted]
Re: WPEngine, Inc. vs. Automattic– Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction
#137Re: WPEngine, Inc. vs. Automattic– Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
But that's a weird thing to do. Why advise people to do stuff detrimental to the world?
Trying to help people be better versions of themselves is a good thing.
But this wasn't about trying to help someone to be better, it was to help them avoid facing consequences for being bad, like advising a wife beater about concealer options for his wife (overly dramatic example, I know).
"You should stop doing dumb/illegal stuff, it might impact you" is very different advice than "You should stop talking about the dumb/illegal stuff you do, they may stop you".
Re: WPEngine, Inc. vs. Automattic– Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's funny because i literally explained in the original thread how this actually works legally, and that's exactly what happened.
Can you link to that explanation, please, for those of us not well versed in how this works?