Is it useful to calibrate the software scale in a way that concludes the majority of codebases are "awful" ? What are we usefully communicating with the word,

Is it useful to calibrate the software scale in a way that concludes the majority of codebases are "awful" ? What are we usefully communicating with the word, if 90% of codebases qualify? Maybe software development is hard, sometimes unpleasant enough, to justify the crazy salaries, and the endless complaining about every codebase more than 2 years old is not quite justified.. As a collective group, software devs are really prone to self-flagellating while they go about delivering billions of dollars in value.