this is faulty logic. you are taking two overlapping issues and framing them as an either/or. matt could easily have removed the conflict interest while not "giving up" on wordpress and continuing to contribute. it's about anticipating any future issues that could arise through governance, not that matt should just stop working on wordpress altogether.
so yes, absolutely WP would be in a better place now had he just removed that aspect of his involvement. by 2010 WP was an ecosystem that was more than just the founder. and ben cook isn't just "some guy".
and more historical context if you want to see what happened to mr. cook and the pattern of retaliation by matt.
the funny thing is i didn't even really care about who ran WP since a few months ago, but due to all the drama u can easily dig this stuff up now and it's not pretty.
so yes, absolutely WP would be in a better place now had he just removed that aspect of his involvement. by 2010 WP was an ecosystem that was more than just the founder. and ben cook isn't just "some guy".
and more historical context if you want to see what happened to mr. cook and the pattern of retaliation by matt.
https://web.archive.org/web/20231004222821/https://wpblogger...
the funny thing is i didn't even really care about who ran WP since a few months ago, but due to all the drama u can easily dig this stuff up now and it's not pretty.