But Glue Is Sticky  🔗 **Source:** [But Glue Is Sticky](https://wank.wordpress.com/2007/04/12/but-glue-is-sticky/) > [!note]+ Document Notes > tags: [#wordpress, #open-source, #community-governance, #automattic, #wordpress-community] > Author: [Author's Name] > Source: [wank.wordpress.com] > Reference: [But Glue is Sticky](https://wank.wordpress.com/2007/04/12/but-glue-is-sticky/) > date created: 2024-11-12 13:30 > > # Title: But Glue is Sticky > <!-- deep-read:sections start --> ## Table of Contents: - [📝 Summary](#-summary) - [📖 Main Content](#-main-content) - [🗒️ Notes](#-notes) - [📖 References](#-references) - [🗣️ Paraphrase](#-paraphrase) - [📰 Newsletter](#-newsletter) - [✅ Action Items](#-action-items) - [🧪 Hypotheses](#-hypotheses) - [📊 Methodology](#-methodology) - [❓ Questions](#-questions) - [🔮 Future Research](#-future-research) - [💡 Implications](#-implications) - [🧠 Learning Styles Assessment](#-learning-styles-assessment) - [📊 Accessibility Assessment](#-accessibility-assessment) - [🌍 DEIB Assessment](#-deib-assessment) - [✅ Logical Validity](#-logical-validity) - [🔍 SEO Evaluation](#-seo-evaluation) - [🎯 Conclusion](#-conclusion) --- ## 📝 Summary: The article "But Glue is Sticky" delves into the intricate and sometimes tense relationships within the WordPress community, particularly between core developers, contributors, and Automattic. The title metaphorically suggests that while WordPress may appear unified, “sticky” issues of governance, transparency, and influence remain underneath. The piece highlights the challenges of maintaining a cohesive community where differing opinions and centralized power may create friction, raising questions about open-source governance and the impact of corporate involvement in the community. ## 📖 Main Content: - **Sticky Dynamics**: The title implies underlying complexities in WordPress governance that keep the community “stuck” in certain challenging dynamics. - **Corporate Influence**: Reflects on Automattic's role and how it shapes the WordPress ecosystem, questioning whether it allows for genuine community-driven decision-making. - **Community Cohesion**: Discusses the tensions that arise from centralized decision-making and how it affects contributors who may feel sidelined. - **Transparency and Trust**: Points to a need for greater transparency within WordPress governance to reinforce trust and engagement among community members. ### 🗒️ Notes - **Tensions in Governance**: - The article critiques the balance between Automattic’s authority and community input. - Questions if WordPress can fully embody open-source ideals with a centralized influence. - **Impact on Contributors**: - Contributors may feel their voices are limited, impacting engagement and morale. - The piece suggests a need for structures that provide clearer channels for contributor feedback. - **Transparency as Key**: - Advocates for more transparency in decision-making as a pathway to improve community trust. ## 📖 References: - *wank.wordpress.com*: "But Glue is Sticky" [link](https://wank.wordpress.com/2007/04/12/but-glue-is-sticky/) ## 🗣️ Paraphrase: 1. *Original*: "Automattic has a strong influence on WordPress, but that doesn’t always make things cohesive or smooth for the community." *Paraphrased*: "Automattic's influence is significant in WordPress, yet it doesn’t always create unity or ease for community members." 2. *Original*: "The community wants transparency, but it feels like key decisions are made in closed rooms." *Paraphrased*: "While the community values transparency, there's a perception that important choices are decided behind closed doors." ## 📰 Newsletter: **Sticky Situations in WordPress** 🧲 Wonder what keeps the WordPress community “stuck” together? In "But Glue is Sticky," the article explores the influence of Automattic on WordPress and how it shapes community dynamics. With a call for more transparency and cohesive decision-making, this article offers insights into the balancing act between corporate involvement and open-source values. A must-read for anyone interested in the future of WordPress governance! [Read more here](https://wank.wordpress.com/2007/04/12/but-glue-is-sticky/) ## ✅ Action Items: 1. **Advocate for Transparency**: Encourage initiatives within WordPress to clarify decision-making processes for contributors. 2. **Support Community Feedback Channels**: Work towards establishing clearer pathways for contributor input in governance. 3. **OSPO Conversations**: Host discussions on governance and transparency in open-source projects, focusing on balancing corporate and community needs. ## 🧪 Hypotheses: - Improved transparency and community involvement in governance decisions may strengthen contributor engagement in WordPress. - Greater cohesion in community feedback processes may reduce perceived friction between Automattic and contributors. ### 📊 Methodology: - **Surveys**: Survey WordPress contributors to gauge their views on governance and transparency. - **Case Study Comparison**: Compare WordPress with other open-source projects to analyze different governance approaches. ### ❓ Questions: - How can WordPress enhance transparency in decision-making processes? - What governance models could better balance corporate influence with community input? ### 🔮 Future Research: - **Corporate Role in Open Source**: Examine case studies of other open-source projects with corporate sponsors and how they manage governance transparency. - **Contributor Retention**: Research the impact of governance transparency on contributor retention and engagement. ### 💡 Implications: - **For WordPress Ecosystem**: Enhancing transparency could foster a more engaged and cohesive contributor community. - **For Open Source**: This discussion contributes to broader conversations on best practices for transparency in open-source projects with corporate influence. ### 🧠 Learning Styles Assessment: 1. **Visual**: Limited visual aids; could benefit from infographics illustrating governance structure. 2. **Auditory**: Suggest an audio discussion on governance issues to enhance accessibility. 3. **Verbal**: Strong written language; could deepen understanding with real-world analogies. 4. **Logical**: Clear logical structure, though adding historical context would improve depth. ### 📊 Accessibility Assessment: - **Screen Reader Compatibility**: Text-based format is accessible. - **Keyboard Navigation**: Compatible as a text article. - **Contrast and Readability**: High contrast, readable font size. ### 🌍 DEIB Assessment: - **Cultural Relevance**: Primarily WordPress-focused; could add more open-source community examples. - **Neurodiversity Support**: Simplifying some sections could improve clarity. - **Representation**: Focuses mainly on WordPress; broader representation could include perspectives from other open-source projects. ### ✅ Logical Validity: - **Balanced Reasoning**: Good use of metaphor to discuss visible vs. hidden governance challenges. - **Potential Fallacies**: Minor “appeal to emotion” in discussing community frustration; could provide more data on specific governance examples to balance. ### 🔍 SEO Evaluation: - **Keywords**: Uses relevant keywords like "WordPress," "transparency," and "governance." - **Meta Description**: Could benefit from a summary meta description emphasizing transparency issues in WordPress governance. - **Title Tag**: Clear, appropriate for content and SEO. ## 🎯 Conclusion: "But Glue is Sticky" offers a reflective look at the complexities of governance in the WordPress ecosystem, especially in the face of corporate influence and the community's desire for transparency. This piece highlights the need for clearer decision-making structures, suggesting that open communication and transparency can help foster a more cohesive and engaged WordPress community. <!-- deep-read:sections end --> 📄 **Full text:** ![[Full Document Contents/Articles/But Glue Is Sticky|But Glue Is Sticky, wordpress™ wank]] ## Highlights - Isn’t this a trend where users & developers contribute to the community, and they are not allowed to make any money for their efforts. But, community owners make cash on the back of users, designers & developers. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jcgb431y0sn00xy4062m1xv1)) - And apparently bringing up [Spamgate](https://wank.wordpress.com/2005/04/01/whos-your-daddy/) constitutes a ‘personal attack’. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jcgb4bacs9p629erq6m6zvpp)) - Which, in a sense, it would. I am not expecting this place to be run by moral paragons who are above reproach. What on earth would I have to write about, if it was? I just dislike the double standards, the sense that there is one rule for the people at the top and another for the ones at the bottom. I don’t like the holding of other people to a higher standard than that which you have set yourself, the expectation that they will behave better than you have done for less reward, or else be punished in a way you never were. I can’t, personally, accept that requiring linkbacks on a theme you’ve made yourself, or specifying non-commercial use, is ethically more dubious than stealing another person’s theme and claiming the credit for it, or advertising your commercial site in a plugin. Even though the lawyers might say that the former is illegal and the latter just dandy. I am not a lawyer, and this time there is no but. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01jcgb4xqwpzgpv6858ewv6kc0))