I'm curious as to how much of your site depends on WordPress, vs. just using a static site generator.

I use Hugo, and I have a relatively ergonomic workflow set up where I use iA Writer to write posts on my iPad, then Working Copy to push them to a git repo. Then my server pulls that repo on a cron job, and builds and deploys it. It’s fine. It gets the job done.

But I confess that being able to post a new entry to an API and have it published instantly sure is attractive. If WordPress had a better security track record, I’d be tempted to switch to it. You don’t get much more secure than a bunch of static files served straight from disk, though.

My mother in law is the one writing content for it. She knows Wordpress from working for other companies. In theory I could teach her something new, but why bother? She enjoys what she’s doing now. I don’t want to take away from that.

That's understandable. My question wasn't meant as a challenge--I'm assuming that most sights could transition to a static site with judicious JS to lively up things.

One killer feature for me aside from usability for less-technical people are comments. While comments are not be necessary for certain types of websites, I consider them essential for anything you might call a blog.

Complexity? MySQL 1 click installs on damn near every WordPress install. I fail to see how it is complex.

Zero clicks is better. And less resource usage, which can help on really small instances with multiple applications.

Keeping it updated and backed up is complex. Sqlite can be embedded inside an application (easy updates) and the database backup is a single file.

Someone's never seen a WP white screen of death because of some esoteric MySQL error the average person will have no idea how to debug.