Mullenweg Calls WordPress “Mediocre Crap” and Overrules Core Committers on 7.0

Matt Mullenweg returned from WordCamp Asia in April 2026 and, catching up on Slack messages during his flight home, found a 10-day-old ping about a disputed Trac ticket involving Akismet and WordPress 7.0. What followed was a wide-ranging critique of WordPress’s development direction in the #core-committers channel. Mullenweg described the Akismet ticket as “a microcosm of all the ways we’ve undone everything that made us successful,” called the project’s output “boring or mediocre crap,” and concluded that “the wheels have fallen off” in terms of how WordPress is built and governed. He then reversed the core committers’ decision and directed that Akismet be added to the WordPress 7.0 Connectors screen.

What the Akismet Dispute Was About

The immediate trigger was a Trac ticket proposing to include Akismet as a default connector on the new AI Connectors screen in WordPress 7.0. An Automattic-sponsored contributor had committed the change during the release candidate phase with limited public discussion. Core committers, including John Blackbourn (sponsored by Human Made), objected to the process: a significant product decision made without the standard review and consensus-building that major additions to core typically require.

Mullenweg had previously indicated he was against forcing Akismet into the Connectors screen. After reviewing the Slack thread, he reversed that position and directed that the change proceed, overruling the objecting committers. When the earlier position was noted, his response was direct: “I did say that, and have changed my mind and we’re doing this.”

The result: Akismet, an Automattic product, will appear on the WordPress 7.0 Connectors screen as of the May 20 release, following a process that multiple core committers had flagged as bypassing standard governance.

The Broader Critique

The Akismet dispute was the trigger, not the full scope of what Mullenweg posted. His critique extended to WordPress’s contribution model. He separately described Five for the Future data (the program through which companies pledge a percentage of their resources to WordPress development) as “worse than useless,” and called for a rethink of how corporate contributions are tracked and valued.

The community response has been significant. Developer Josh Collinsworth published a post titled “If WordPress is to survive, Matt Mullenweg must be removed,” which circulated widely in WordPress and developer communities.

The Governance Problem

WordPress operates under a BDFL (Benevolent Dictator for Life) model, with Mullenweg holding effective authority over both the WordPress Foundation and Automattic. The April incident illustrates what that model looks like under stress: a founder who is simultaneously the harshest critic of the project and the person with unilateral authority to override its maintainers.

This is not a new tension in WordPress governance, but the timing is notable. WordPress 7.0 is scheduled for release on May 20, weeks away. During the release candidate phase, core committers found their decisions reversed after a Slack message thread. That is the decision-making environment in which the final version of WordPress 7.0 is being shaped.

For businesses built on WordPress, the incident raises process questions, not technical ones. The software will ship on May 20. The question is what it reveals about how core decisions get made in future versions, and under what circumstances.

What This Means for the WordPress Ecosystem

For managed WordPress hosts, two practical questions follow from the April incident. First, Five for the Future: Mullenweg publicly called the contribution tracking data “worse than useless” and called for a rethink of the program. That affects how companies justify and structure their WordPress investment, and what the long-term contributor base looks like. Second, enterprise positioning: businesses evaluating WordPress as a platform now have a recent, documented incident about how core decisions get made during release cycles and what happens when the project lead changes his mind.

Neither question is new to anyone who has followed WordPress governance closely. But the timing, weeks before a major release with public criticism coming from WordPress’s own founder, gives them more weight than they typically carry.