Menu Close

yawp (noun): a harsh or hoarse cry, or yelp.

yawp (verb): shout or exclaim hoarsely; to make a raucus noise or clamour.

Like Gutenberg’s printing press, the word “yawp” comes from the 15th century, known later from a line in an 1892 poem by Walt Whitman, “I sound my barbaric yawp over the roofs of the world.”

The girl pictured is the original header image from the blogging software b2, which referred to itself as a “classy news/weblog tool (aka logware)” from roughly 2001 to 2003.

yawp (.foo): YAWP is a recursive acronym, and like “foo”, it can have many meanings, as long as the acronym remains recursive. Yawp is Another Web Platform. Capitalize it however you like, dangit.

I think she’s yawping. Are you ready to yawp?

What?

About

In late September 2024, we entered a chaotic interlude in the history of WordPress, involving not just the software, but the major players involved and the community around, with implications for the wider open source software movement.

The pretext on which the controversy began is disastrously wrong, based in demonstrably flawed logic. As the WP Community sets to re-lay its foundation, it is imperative we not repeat the same mistakes. Here I’m referring not simply to practical matters like governance structures, but the free and open source software (FOSS) philosophy and ethos, which are fundamental to the community.

Looking for more context? There are many summaries online, both as news stories and as running chronologies to links. There’s a (co-)founder, a private equity firm, a lawsuit, lots of fallout, and a community in crisis.

If you want to read in the order I’m building my thesis, here’s the outline:

  1. Unmasking the Tragedy of the Commons
  2. Why Unmasking the “Tragedy of the Commons” Matters
  3. Excursus: Methodological Individualism & the Rational Individual (tangential material)
  4. Free-Riding Free Software
  5. Reframing the Maker-Taker Problem

Why the recovery of FLOSS ideals is needed in the WordPress community more now than ever involves a more direct commentary:

  1. Breaking the Status Quo: A New Roadmap
  2. Breaking the Status Quo: How it Came to This
  3. Breaking the Status Quo is The Future of WordPress

Latest Article

Reframing the Maker-Taker Problem

Philosophy
Abstract

A number of theoretical models suggest that there’s a problem with sustaining development of open source projects. The Free Rider Problem and the Tragedy of the Commons are the leading two, but a more recent theory called the “Maker-Taker Problem” has been put forward by Drupal founder Dries Buytaert. His description of the problem has been generally well-received within the open source community. His theory is better-reasoned and takes into account some of the issues with other models. Unfortunately the theory still suffers from a few flaws that call its conclusions into question. In addition to one of its key foundation sources not reflecting the impact of online collaboration, some of its presuppositions mean it cannot be taken as a certainty, and make it potentially applicable to open source but not to free software. After describing the terminology, this article considers the Maker-Taker Problem as presented, highlighting certain weaknesses that make the model unreliable for defining and addressing the problem it presumes.

Tagged:
, , , , , , , , ,
Read More
Freeway sign showing exit to Governance

Breaking the Status Quo is The Future of WordPress

In this article, I use Matt Mullenweg’s response to a recent article based on an interview he gave to Inc. as a framework to outline some of the reasons why the WordPress project needs a new governance model. I support recent calls for this change. In addition to other reasons I have outlined in related posts, I recap here Matt’s departure from FLOSS ideals, his misrepresentation of his motives in attacking WP Engine, and in attempts to then cast himself as the victim. I then briefly discuss how the increasingly chaotic atmosphere in the community increases what is already an inherently unacceptable level of risk to the WordPress supply chain.
Read More
Planet of the Apes final scene with WordPress logo

Breaking the Status Quo: How it Came to This

In this article, I highlight a few points of WordPress history that were early indicators of an eventual crisis in the project leadership. With increasing calls and support for a leadership change in the project, I review how the direction and goals set by Matt Mullenweg are increasingly at odds with FLOSS values and with the needs of the WordPress community. Matt’s needs are primarily aligned with Automattic’s over those of the community, and the strain is starting to show along numerous fault lines.
Read More
rusted chain snapping under strain

Breaking the Status Quo: A New Roadmap

The context for this article is the publishing of recent views by Henrik Luehrsen, Joost de Valk, and others who are pointing out that WordPress needs to modernize its Core and deal with its technical debt. In this context, they advocate for making greater use of canonical plugins, which project co-founder Matt Mullenweg supports. The general consensus is that WordPress seems to have lost its way under Mullenweg’s leadership, and needs to establish a roadmap for the Core software that restores its earlier value on simplicity. In this article, I affirm greater use of canonical plugins, but with a slight change to their definition so that they remain canonical plugins rather than being added to Core, and that many features now in Core should be removed and replaced with canonical plugins. I further suggest making greater use of “drop-ins”, part of WordPress’ Core architecture that allows parts of it to be replaced in a modular fashion. I recommend what I call a “Lean-Core Approach”, offering twelve merits for it, followed by five additional considerations. Taken together, they provide a direction for updating, modernizing, and expanding the future of WordPress Core.
Read More
Vintage Bus

Free-Riding Free Software

In this article I consider the Free Rider Problem and how it applies to free software, with references to the “Tragedy of the Commons” and the “Maker-Taker” problem. We find that with a nominal production cost approaching zero for free software, the free rider problem is not economically applicable. Moreover, when examining the nature of free software as a commons, we find that not only is it non-rivalrous, it is an anti-rival good. Far from being a problem, so-called “free-riders” actually increase the network value of the software, with each additional user contributing more value than they take, simply by becoming users. Once again, we find that free software defies the economic theory being forced upon it. In open source communities, “free riders” should more accurately thought of as software users who create value simply by showing up.
Read More