#Ecosystem thinking and design

[paul4innovating]

Thinking and Designing for Business Ecosystems

Thinking & designing Business Ecosystems to build innovation differently Why should we think about the potential within Business Ecosystems? What does thinking and designing for Business Ecosystems mean? Thinking and designing for business ecosystems represents a fundamental shift in how we approach business strategy, innovation, and value creation. Let me break this down for you in a way that…

[primal-con]

Have these concepts for a stranded on an alien planet deadceptor au I was chewing on a little while back

[natjennie]

just had an idea out of nowhere for a d&d campaign that takes place really widespread across the continent? world? whatever and has the players visit a handful of specific areas in different parts of the world so they go to like the jungle and then the desert and then the snow and mountains and then the ocean or w/e and each region has it's own little intricacies and whatnot a little dungeon. a little local mystery. and there's always like a blacksmith and a temple and a druid guild or w/e, and then it turns out eventually that the druids from each region have been communicating and they've been working together to subtly manipulate the wildlife in their ecosystem to essentially wipe out certain areas and take control of the continent and in the boss fight they would all summon creatures from their different specialties so there's like rock golems and polar bears and fish monsters and desert lizard people.

[pyrriax]

im going to tear this apart into shreds

[m-dreamer-is-trans-inclusive]

You know if the Human Zoo from Steven Universe existed irl, there would be people literally begging to get in it.

[basementdwellerinthestars]

The only biome recognizable as a forest, with trees and grass. No other distinct biome has anything like it, nor any other kind of tree.

Oddly artificial, built in a terrace formation of slowly declining steppes towards a flat, almost circular center. All the trees bend inward towards this decline. Considering there a several of these formations scattered about. Some believe it to be a form of tree farm.

Untouched by the waterfalls, with no standing water to speak of. The waterfalls scatter about the edges, but never cross over a seemingly invisible barrier.

The majority of wildlife seems to live in here, whether that be the infected or the few safe. Evidence of the Golden Absolution chokes this place, so it's very easy to misstep and the forest should be avoided when possible.

No shrubbery to speak of, just trees and grass. Some of the grass has grown tall, but most of it is cut short, these sections referred to as Turf. It, too, feels artificial. Grazing animals don't even try to eat it.

Filled with primarily Catalade Trees and Vurna Berries. The animals who live there subsist mostly off of each other, being scavengers. The few uninfected eat the tree leaves. None of them eat the berries. It is assumed they are poisonous for the creatures living there.

[thethingything]

so we have a weird time with making OCs because we always seem to introject them so then we're reluctant to make more OCs but at the same time, we do still want to play around with making fun characters, and it occurred to me at some point last night that we'd probably find this a lot easier if instead of individual characters, we just started doing funky speculative biology shit and making up a planet with a bunch of weird alien species on it or something

[caifanes]

had a dream where like. a whole bunch of shit was going down but also i had tattoos so at one point i was like. ‘this is happening but at least i have tattoos….’ but i don’t :(

[alteredphoenix]

Since I've been asked before if I had considered doing art based off my Berseria/Luminaria fics (or some scenes in them), and I would, I've been considering taking a crack at doing a comic - just to see how it would go.

I'd go with a premise that takes place after Celia's ep2, where two children of Lazui (I like to think of them as being actual howlines connected to Lazui, rather than the "angels/somewhat vaguely humanoid/higher beings of existence in animal guise" trope I like to inject my Lumi fics with) observe Michelle and, confused at her reaction, ask themselves "what kind of wolf doesn't want to hunt/what kind of wolf doesn't enjoy the thrill of the hunt", which would lead into an exploration of mercy, death, predator/prey dynamics and their role on the ecosystem (gradually on the downswing as it is in canon), and how growing up in Amr Qhagan (sheep country/Tarulhan's domain) has shaped Michelle's upbringing and morality even as it clashes with her displays of pragmatism.

Just a little something to get experimental with (as the idea itself isn't based off a written fic at this time).

[headspace-hotel]

the problem i have with the whole "humans and nature as opposed and mutually exclusive forces" style of environmentalism is that it discourages people from a sustainable, mutualistic relationship with the ecosystems around them, because getting resources from an ecosystem is Bad. Therefore it requires you to think that parts of Earth that provide resources are not ecosystems.

this is where you get unbelievably stupid crap like the "half earth" project that proposes "protecting" half of Earth's land mass as nature preserves, never mind how we choose what half or what happens to the other half.

this type of environmentalism literally encourages people to think of their own presence as excluding or cancelling out "Nature."

And so people think of their lawns as Not Ecosystems, as Not Nature, so they cannot think "How do i live in right relationship with my ecosystem, as its caretaker?" This is death to ecological thinking.

The lawn was consciously created by intention and design, with heavy machinery that was manufactured, sold, and operated, it is not spontaneously created by fumes that the human body gives off.

You act upon the land, now time to learn what you are doing, and who you are doing it to.

[gsasustainability]

Keeping in mind that buildings are our built habitats; They would embody resilience and resourcefulness if collectively envisioned

An Academic Research Project for the Advanced Research Centre of the University of Glasgow under the Glasgow School of Arts and in association with the Centre for Sustainable Solutions of the University of Glasgow and GALLANT, by Shravya Dayaneni. Supervisor: Dr Simon Beeson

As cities grapple with environmental challenges ranging from dwindling resources to climate change, the need for sustainable socio-ecological inhabitation has never been more pressing. But what if, instead of merely sustaining, we aim to regenerate? The article highlights a comprehensive project intervention, through a collaboration with ‘the Advanced Research Center’ of the University of Glasgow. This project not only aims to address social, economic and environmental challenges but also enriches conventional retrofitting methods with a holistic solution for introducing interdependence and ecological democracy into organisational/ institutional spheres. It is possible to promote regeneration through the seamless integration of science, technology, fiscal prudence, and biomimicry with regenerative design. This paradigm shift to ‘Regerative Design’ requires us to look at buildings merely as built habitats, like a microdiverse environment or a nest that must solve for all of its needs.

Keywords: Ecological Integration, Biomimicry, Social Innovation, Symbiocene Adaptation, Ecosystem Services, Interdependence, Institutional Buildings, Regeneration, Design Thinking, Fiscal Mindfulness, Social-Identity Theory, Behavioral Modeling, Strategic Visualization, Resiliency, Dynamism, Holistic Design, Ecological-Social-Economic Convergence, Design Emergence

Regenerative Design; The most fascinating ‘Bio-reflective Design Paradigm’

Conventional views often perceive regenerative design goals as impractical or utopian. This project dispels such notions by marrying financial viability, environmental efficiency, and social well-being. It aims to reintroduce the principle of interdependence into modern structures, a concept illustrated by Martin Avila (2022) in his book ‘Designing for Interdependence - A Poetics of Relating’. Inspired by Bill Caplan's "Buildings Are for People - Human Ecological Design" (2016) has been invaluable in focusing attention on the human experience and in recognizing challenges as opportunities for creativity, rather than obstacles. Overall, the idea of interdependence and human-ecological design emphasizes the idea of collaboration, and how people and their environment are connected. It's about creating a relationship between people, their environment, and the structures created by them, and how they all interact to create a system that works for everyone. By reintroducing the concept of interdependence, the aim is to create a system that is more equitable, and that accounts for the human experience.

The Participatory Approach: Why Stakeholder Involvement is Crucial? Buildings are for people

Given the complexity of real-world challenges, a participatory approach involving diverse stakeholders ensures that the project stays grounded and effective. Initial consultations have set the stage for a long-term commitment to ‘ecological democracy’ as defined by Hester, R.T. (2006) and sustainable practices. It was important to delve deep into participatory methodologies, crafting a simulator tool (image in the next section) enriched with contextual theories like utilizing occupants’ motivations and socio-cultural relationships of users with the buildings such as ‘Social-Identity Theory’ Hogg (2006) as an opportunity to drive eco-responsible practices in our conventional built-environments.

A Versatile Tool: The Eco-systematic and Bio-mimetic Simulator

Developed through design synthesis, this tool serves as both a practical guide and a framework for understanding the larger ecological and social implications of built environments. The tool employed a unique "eco-systematic innovations deck," a curated set of cards containing innovative ecological concepts to service interventions thoroughly researched and colour-coded for different user personas, and a 'bio-mimetic library' for ecological visual inspirations. These elements could be laid out on a canvas that includes spaces for notes, challenges, and evaluative measures, offering a versatile tool for stakeholders. The goal was to enable the co-creation of the possible synergies for a problem or a scenario with a socio-economic-ecological convergence for all the stakeholders including, University estate management, building management, funders, users-occupants, and visitors and make it inclusive for all types of workplace-minority-groups like ‘parents’, ‘the differently-abled’ and even ‘the pet-owners’.

There are three pillars to the project

1. Navigate Opportunities: Investigate practical avenues for embedding ecosystem services within built frameworks and aligning human structures with ecosystems.

2. Maximize Benefits: Forge integrative solutions that cater to both human and non-human species, all the while respecting financial limitations, to establish a model of regeneration.

3. Visualize Possibilities: Employ design thinking to facilitate the visualization of ecological integration and civic innovation to drive informed choices for all stakeholders' management.

Toward a New Standard in Building Design

This project aims to position the ARC Building as a paradigm of ecological-social-economic convergence, laying down a blueprint for future developments in institutional architecture. We are at an inflection point where our buildings can either continue to be part of the problem or can become part of the solution. The conceptualization of this project takes a bold step in the latter direction, and it sets the stage for similar initiatives across the globe. By forging an environment where the ecological, social, and economic dimensions are considered as a unified entity, the goal is to lead the change in creating a new standard for what our built habitats could and should be.

Practical Implementation for Building Investors as well as Managers

For practical application with building owners and managers, addressing their concerns and highlighting the long-term benefits of regenerative design is crucial. It's recognized that some solutions may involve initial investments, and emphasis should be placed on how these investments can yield significant returns, not only in terms of sustainability but also in staff recruitment, welfare, happiness, productivity, and retention.

1. Emphasizing Benefits to Building Owners and Managers:

   - Staff Recruitment and Retention: The implementation of regenerative design can enhance a building's appeal as a workplace, fostering a healthier, more engaging environment that can attract and retain talented employees.

   - Productivity and Well-being: A regenerative building promotes the well-being and productivity of occupants. Improved indoor air quality, access to green spaces, and a connection to nature within the workplace are factors that enhance employee satisfaction and performance.

2. Managing Risk:

   - Quick Return on Investment: It's understood that building owners and managers may have concerns about financial implications. Many regenerative solutions offer a quick return on investment by reducing operational costs, such as energy consumption and maintenance expenses.

   - Budget and Financial Synergies: The regenerative approach aligns with budget and financial requirements, aiming to provide cost-effective solutions that don't strain financial resources but, instead, contribute to long-term savings and sustainability.

3. Realistic Expectations and User Involvement:

   - Setting Realistic Expectations: It's important to manage expectations realistically, acknowledging that not all ideas may be immediately implemented, and some may require ongoing evaluation and adaptation.

   - Inclusivity for All Users: The approach considers all users of the building, including employees from diverse backgrounds, parents, differently-abled individuals, and even pet owners. The aim is to create an inclusive environment that benefits everyone.

By addressing these concerns and emphasizing the tangible benefits of regenerative design, the adoption of these principles becomes not only practical but also highly rewarding for building owners and managers. Together, the creation of environments that are not just sustainable but truly regenerative contributes to a more resilient and prosperous future.

What Lies Ahead

The future of this project includes rigorous testing of the 'Eco-systematic and Bio-mimetic Simulator' tool, refinement based on stakeholder feedback, and eventually scaling it for broader applications. With looming climate crises and dwindling resources, it is projects like these that offer a glimmer of hope for taking the best solutions possible and a roadmap for building resilient, nurturing, and sustainable communities for the future.

Measuring Success is a crucial part

Based on stakeholder meetings with experts like Dr Jaime Toney, the Director of the Centre for Sustainable Solutions, the project intends to set forth measurable objectives and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that can be evaluated in two years' time.

By incorporating a holistic view that synergizes ecological, social, and economic dimensions, this project promises not just to build but to regenerate and revive built environments, making a compelling case for a more resilient and sustainable urban society and development.

Acknowledgements

A special thanks to all our stakeholders, including the Centre for Sustainable Solutions, the University of Glasgow, the GALLANT project, ARC Building Management and the Glasgow School of Arts for their invaluable insights, collaboration and ongoing commitment to Responsible Development. And a shoutout to Dr Simon Beeson and Dr Michael Pierre Johnson for guiding the project.

[paul4innovating]

We still need to sell Business Ecosystems

The selling of Business Ecosystems needs facilitation and realization So often, you get the question, “What are the arguments for selling B2B business ecosystems?” Then why would enterprises invest in such a significant change to their systems and structures? Where is the value and payback? It should be recognized that selling B2B business ecosystems to enterprises can be a compelling…

[letialia]

Very interesting experiment for a new design process by #IBM that is place-led/centred as oppose to the widely known and used HCD. 

It places bees, rivers, etc at the centre of the design process to inform design decisions that have sustainability and regeneration at their core. As interesting and provoking as it can be, I find it a bit fictional. Firstly, animals, natural elements and humans don’t have the same needs and don’t respond to design the same way. Secondly, I think the value of HCD is to keep building and developing its own concept to align humans’ needs to the planet ones and create solutions that create harmony between the two. Perhaps system thinking or system-centred design could be a more appropriate approach to the context we are all in, where place, culture and identity can inform design solutions that respond to human needs in alignment with nature.

[cognitivejustice]

Restoring Indigenous aquaculture heals both ecosystems and communities in Hawai‘i

For generations, native Hawaiians have understood that their aquaculture systems, fishponds known as loko i‘a, serve as nurseries that seed fish populations in surrounding waters. For the first time, a team of scientists from the Hawaiʻi Institute of Marine Biology (HIMB) have modeled this feat of Indigenous science in a study.

“We are using science to translate ‘ike kupuna, or Indigenous knowledge, into policy,” said study co-author Kawika Winter, an ecologist at HIMB and He‘eia National Estuarine Research Reserve (NERR).

“The value of this paper is that it’s one of the first, if not the first, to really show that there are ways to do aquaculture in ways that benefit the system around it.”

In partnership with He‘eia NERR and Paepae o He‘eia, a nonprofit organization dedicated to stewarding the He‘eia loko i‘a, an ancient Hawaiian fishpond enclosing 36 hectares (88 acres) of brackish water, the team simulated different restoration scenarios in Kāne‘ohe Bay on O‘ahu Island based on a simplified food web. The study found that restoring more of the bay into fully functional loko iʻa would grow fish populations not just within the ponds, but across the bay.

“Aquaculture has a really bad reputation for basically destroying areas around it, but those are commercial approaches to aquaculture that aren’t holistic in their thinking or values-based like Indigenous management,” Winter said. “Rather than ensuring the health of the system, commercial aquaculture is concerned with maximizing profits.”

Winter attributed the success of the loko i’a design to Indigenous thought processes: “Indigenous thinking is operating within the opportunities and constraints of this system and figuring out a way to make things abundant within that context, sometimes even increasing abundance beyond natural levels.

Restoring ecosystems and relationships

Since co-founding Paepae o He‘eia in 2001, study co-author Hi‘ilei Kawelo, a sixth-generation Hawaiian from Kāne‘ohe Bay, has witnessed thousands of volunteers transform the He‘eia loko i‘a.

With the ongoing restoration, Paepae o He‘eia has seen both the aquatic environment and participants’ well-being improve with increased access to traditional foods, strengthening their relationship to place, and fortifying their family and community relationships. “For me and for a lot of our employees, this is one of our outlets, if not our primary outlet for exercising aloha ‘āina [love of the land],” Kawelo said.

“‘Āina is so important, because it is a term for a system that has the nature and its people in an inseparable reciprocal relationship,” Winter said. “The concept is core to this work because it’s about getting back into a way of thinking where there is no separation between the lands, the waters and us.”

While the overarching goal of Paepae o He‘eia and other fishponds is to revitalize Hawai‘i’s extensive Indigenous aquaculture system, Kotubetey said he knows the work may take generations.

[pyrriax]

ok i know that Technically this has already been posted (just not under my own account, i gave permission for data to post it) BUT i feel like you guys would appreciate these freaks ^_^

[ maxwell is @specialcontainmentdatabase's character, not mine! i just got to draw him ]

[tinystepsforward]

autocrattic (more matt shenanigans, not tumblr this time)

I am almost definitely not the right person for this writeup, but I'm closer than most people on here, so here goes! This is all open-source tech drama, and I take my time laying out the context, but the short version is: Matt tried to extort another company, who immediately posted receipts, and now he's refusing to log off again. The long version is... long.

If you don't need software context, scroll down/find the "ok tony that's enough. tell me what's actually happening" heading, or just go read the pink sections. Or look at this PDF.

the background

So. Matt's original Good Idea was starting WordPress with fellow developer Mike Little in 2003, which is free and open-source software (FOSS) that was originally just for blogging, but now powers lots of websites that do other things. In particular, Automattic acquired WooCommerce a long time ago, which is free online store software you can run on WordPress.

FOSS is... interesting. It's a world that ultimately is powered by people who believe deeply that information and resources should be free, but often have massive blind spots (for example, Wikipedia's consistently had issues with bias, since no amount of "anyone can edit" will overcome systemic bias in terms of who has time to edit or is not going to be driven away by the existing contributor culture). As with anything else that people spend thousands of hours doing online, there's drama. As with anything else that's technically free but can be monetized, there are:

Heaps of companies and solo developers who profit off WordPress themes, plugins, hosting, and other services;

Conflicts between volunteer contributors and for-profit contributors;

Annoying founders who get way too much credit for everything the project has become.

the WordPress ecosystem

A project as heavily used as WordPress (some double-digit percentage of the Internet uses WP. I refuse to believe it's the 43% that Matt claims it is, but it's a pretty large chunk) can't survive just on the spare hours of volunteers, especially in an increasingly monetised world where its users demand functional software, are less and less tech or FOSS literate, and its contributors have no fucking time to build things for that userbase.

Matt runs Automattic, which is a privately-traded, for-profit company. The free software is run by the WordPress Foundation, which is technically completely separate (wordpress.org). The main products Automattic offers are WordPress-related: WordPress.com, a host which was designed to be beginner-friendly; Jetpack, a suite of plugins which extend WordPress in a whole bunch of ways that may or may not make sense as one big product; WooCommerce, which I've already mentioned. There's also WordPress VIP, which is the fancy bespoke five-digit-plus option for enterprise customers. And there's Tumblr, if Matt ever succeeds in putting it on WordPress. (Every Tumblr or WordPress dev I know thinks that's fucking ridiculous and impossible. Automattic's hiring for it anyway.)

Automattic devotes a chunk of its employees toward developing Core, which is what people in the WordPress space call WordPress.org, the free software. This is part of an initiative called Five for the Future — 5% of your company's profits off WordPress should go back into making the project better. Many other companies don't do this.

There are lots of other companies in the space. GoDaddy, for example, barely gives back in any way (and also sucks). WP Engine is the company this drama is about. They don't really contribute to Core. They offer relatively expensive WordPress hosting, as well as providing a series of other WordPress-related products like LocalWP (local site development software), Advanced Custom Fields (the easiest way to set up advanced taxonomies and other fields when making new types of posts. If you don't know what this means don't worry about it), etc.

Anyway. Lots of strong personalities. Lots of for-profit companies. Lots of them getting invested in, or bought by, private equity firms.

Matt being Matt, tech being tech

As was said repeatedly when Matt was flipping out about Tumblr, all of the stuff happening at Automattic is pretty normal tech company behaviour. Shit gets worse. People get less for their money. WordPress.com used to be a really good place for people starting out with a website who didn't need "real" WordPress — for $48 a year on the Personal plan, you had really limited features (no plugins or other customisable extensions), but you had a simple website with good SEO that was pretty secure, relatively easy to use, and 24-hour access to Happiness Engineers (HEs for short. Bad job title. This was my job) who could walk you through everything no matter how bad at tech you were. Then Personal plan users got moved from chat to emails only. Emails started being responded to by contractors who didn't know as much as HEs did and certainly didn't get paid half as well. Then came AI, and the mandate for HEs to try to upsell everyone things they didn't necessarily need. (This is the point at which I quit.)

But as was said then as well, most tech CEOs don't publicly get into this kind of shitfight with their users. They're horrid tyrants, but they don't do it this publicly.

ok tony that's enough. tell me what's actually happening

WordCamp US, one of the biggest WordPress industry events of the year, is the backdrop for all this. It just finished.

There are.... a lot of posts by Matt across multiple platforms because, as always, he can't log off. But here's the broad strokes.

Sep 17

Matt publishes a wanky blog post about companies that profit off open source without giving back. It targets a specific company, WP Engine.

Compare the Five For the Future pages from Automattic and WP Engine, two companies that are roughly the same size with revenue in the ballpark of half a billion. These pledges are just a proxy and aren’t perfectly accurate, but as I write this, Automattic has 3,786 hours per week (not even counting me!), and WP Engine has 47 hours. WP Engine has good people, some of whom are listed on that page, but the company is controlled by Silver Lake, a private equity firm with $102 billion in assets under management. Silver Lake doesn’t give a dang about your Open Source ideals. It just wants a return on capital. So it’s at this point that I ask everyone in the WordPress community to vote with your wallet. Who are you giving your money to? Someone who’s going to nourish the ecosystem, or someone who’s going to frack every bit of value out of it until it withers?

(It's worth noting here that Automattic is funded in part by BlackRock, who Wikipedia calls "the world's largest asset manager".)

Sep 20 (WCUS final day)

WP Engine puts out a blog post detailing their contributions to WordPress.

Matt devotes his keynote/closing speech to slamming WP Engine.

He also implies people inside WP Engine are sending him information.

For the people sending me stuff from inside companies, please do not do it on your work device. Use a personal phone, Signal with disappearing messages, etc. I have a bunch of journalists happy to connect you with as well. #wcus — Twitter I know private equity and investors can be brutal (read the book Barbarians at the Gate). Please let me know if any employee faces firing or retaliation for speaking up about their company's participation (or lack thereof) in WordPress. We'll make sure it's a big public deal and that you get support. — Tumblr

Matt also puts out an offer live at WordCamp US:

“If anyone of you gets in trouble for speaking up in favor of WordPress and/or open source, reach out to me. I’ll do my best to help you find a new job.” — source tweet, RTed by Matt

He also puts up a poll asking the community if WP Engine should be allowed back at WordCamps.

Sep 21

Matt writes a blog post on the WordPress.org blog (the official project blog!): WP Engine is not WordPress.

He opens this blog post by claiming his mom was confused and thought WP Engine was official.

The blog post goes on about how WP Engine disabled post revisions (which is a pretty normal thing to do when you need to free up some resources), therefore being not "real" WordPress. (As I said earlier, WordPress.com disables most features for Personal and Premium plans. Or whatever those plans are called, they've been renamed like 12 times in the last few years. But that's a different complaint.)

Sep 22: More bullshit on Twitter. Matt makes a Reddit post on r/Wordpress about WP Engine that promptly gets deleted. Writeups start to come out:

Search Engine Journal: WordPress Co-Founder Mullenweg Sparks Backlash

TechCrunch: Matt Mullenweg calls WP Engine a ‘cancer to WordPress’ and urges community to switch providers

Sep 23 onward

Okay, time zones mean I can't effectively sequence the rest of this.

Matt defends himself on Reddit, casually mentioning that WP Engine is now suing him.

Also here's a decent writeup from someone involved with the community that may be of interest.

WP Engine drops the full PDF of their cease and desist, which includes screenshots of Matt apparently threatening them via text.

Twitter link | Direct PDF link

This PDF includes some truly fucked texts where Matt appears to be trying to get WP Engine to pay him money unless they want him to tell his audience at WCUS that they're evil.

Matt, after saying he's been sued and can't talk about it, hosts a Twitter Space and talks about it for a couple hours.

He also continues to post on Reddit, Twitter, and on the Core contributor Slack.

Here's a comment where he says WP Engine could have avoided this by paying Automattic 8% of their revenue.

Another, 20 hours ago, where he says he's being downvoted by "trolls, probably WPE employees"

At some point, Matt updates the WordPress Foundation trademark policy. I am 90% sure this was him — it's not legalese and makes no fucking sense to single out WP Engine.

Old text: The abbreviation “WP” is not covered by the WordPress trademarks and you are free to use it in any way you see fit. New text: The abbreviation “WP” is not covered by the WordPress trademarks, but please don’t use it in a way that confuses people. For example, many people think WP Engine is “WordPress Engine” and officially associated with WordPress, which it’s not. They have never once even donated to the WordPress Foundation, despite making billions of revenue on top of WordPress.

Sep 25: Automattic puts up their own legal response.

anyway this fucking sucks

This is bigger than anything Matt's done before. I'm so worried about my friends who're still there. The internal ramifications have... been not great so far, including that Matt's naturally being extra gung-ho about "you're either for me or against me and if you're against me then don't bother working your two weeks".

Despite everything, I like WordPress. (If you dig into this, you'll see plenty of people commenting about blocks or Gutenberg or React other things they hate. Unlike many of the old FOSSheads, I actually also think Gutenberg/the block editor was a good idea, even if it was poorly implemented.)

I think that the original mission — to make it so anyone can spin up a website that's easy enough to use and blog with — is a good thing. I think, despite all the ways being part of FOSS communities since my early teens has led to all kinds of racist, homophobic and sexual harm for me and for many other people, that free and open-source software is important.

So many people were already burning out of the project. Matt has been doing this for so long that those with long memories can recite all the ways he's wrecked shit back a decade or more. Most of us are exhausted and need to make money to live. The world is worse than it ever was.

Social media sucks worse and worse, and this was a world in which people missed old webrings, old blogs, RSS readers, the world where you curated your own whimsical, unpaid corner of the Internet. I started actually actively using my own WordPress blog this year, and I've really enjoyed it.

And people don't want to deal with any of this.

The thing is, Matt's right about one thing: capital is ruining free open-source software. What he's wrong about is everything else: the idea that WordPress.com isn't enshittifying (or confusing) at a much higher rate than WP Engine, the idea that WP Engine or Silver Lake are the only big players in the field, the notion that he's part of the solution and not part of the problem.

But he's started a battle where there are no winners but the lawyers who get paid to duke it out, and all the volunteers who've survived this long in an ecosystem increasingly dominated by big money are giving up and leaving.

Anyway if you got this far, consider donating to someone on gazafunds.com. It'll take much less time than reading this did.