A recent decision by WordCamp Europe to reject Patchstack’s sponsorship application for the 2025 event has ignited widespread debate within the WordPress community. Patchstack, a prominent player in WordPress security, was informed of its ineligibility due to what organizers described as a lack of “significant” contributions to the WordPress ecosystem.
The decision was communicated via email from Felipe Santos, who explained that WordCamp sponsorships are now being evaluated with a greater focus on a company’s contributions to the WordPress project. This shift aims to prioritize sponsors who actively engage with the community and adhere to the Five for the Future initiative, a program encouraging organizations to dedicate resources to WordPress development.
Patchstack CEO Oliver Sild countered the decision, pointing out inconsistencies in the process. “The tier we applied to still has six spots open,” Sild stated, adding that other companies without active Five for the Future pledges were approved for sponsorship. Sild also highlighted Patchstack’s extensive contributions to WordPress security, including publishing 76% of all known WordPress-related vulnerabilities and hosting a Zero-Day Bug Bounty Program, which awarded the largest bounty in WordPress history.
Community members quickly rallied behind Patchstack, expressing frustration over what they perceived as an unjust decision. Many questioned the criteria used to evaluate sponsors, particularly the reliance on Five for the Future data, which some critics argue is unreliable. Prominent WordPress figures voiced their support for Patchstack, with some calling for greater transparency and consistency in sponsorship decisions.
Social media erupted with reactions. Simon Harper of SRH Design called the rejection “ridiculous,” while Taco Verdo from Emilia Capital expressed disappointment in the process. Other voices, such as Francesca Marano, former community team member and current Head of Partnership at Patchstack, criticized the lack of public discussion and clear criteria for sponsorship evaluation.
Amid the backlash, Matt Mullenweg, co-founder of WordPress, acknowledged the concerns. Referring to the email sent to Patchstack as “crappy,” he promised to investigate the matter. Mullenweg’s response, while appreciated by some, did little to quell the broader criticism regarding WordCamp Europe’s evolving sponsorship policies.
Adding to the controversy, Sild noted that despite Patchstack’s direct inquiries, organizers failed to provide further clarification on their decision. Sild expressed disappointment over the lack of transparency and pointed out that WordCamp sponsorship guidelines do not explicitly require adherence to Five for the Future.
Patchstack has since reaffirmed its commitment to the WordPress community by rejoining the Five for the Future initiative, pledging contributors across various teams. However, the incident has left lingering questions about the fairness and inclusivity of WordCamp Europe’s sponsorship process.
The controversy marks a significant moment for WordCamp Europe, which has previously faced criticism for issues related to diversity and inclusivity. This latest dispute underscores the challenges of balancing community values with organizational priorities. As WordCamp organizers work to refine their processes, the incident serves as a reminder of the need for transparency, consistency, and open dialogue within the WordPress ecosystem.