I do feel your pain with these crappy tutorials, and many of them are glorified blogspam or recycling/reheats of the same thing you could have already found out

I do feel your pain with these crappy tutorials, and many of them are glorified blogspam or recycling/reheats of the same thing you could have already found out by reading the docs. There's no depth, no referencing of documentation, very little reasoning about why the thing you're explaining works. That said...ideally if the author abides by (1) do proper research and (2) "Your tutorial can be reviewed by other brilliant engineers who can point out your mistakes" then there's no reason why you couldn't produce a reasonable quality tutorial in this way. I think this article is written for developers/engineers who's overall skill level and expertise is a cut above inexperienced folks who're just starting out. i.e. you know how to research, you have a working familiarity with the tech stack you're working with (and broader awareness of other tech stacks), you know how to ask a "good question" on Stack Overflow (or have read and understood Jon Skeet's "Writing the perfect question" article[0]). It's kinda like taking rubber ducking to the next level and sharing your learning experience. [0]: https://codeblog.jonskeet.uk/2010/08/29/writing-the-perfect-question/ https://codeblog.jonskeet.uk/2010/08/29/writing-the-perfect-...