I've worked in very high process environments (CMM 3 as one example) on occasion and for the most part they've been really awesome and focused on greatness. Mor

I've worked in very high process environments (CMM 3 as one example) on occasion and for the most part they've been really awesome and focused on greatness. More please! That's not the narrative I see here (these comments), so maybe the foregoing is surprising to some of you. For many reasons I take it as fact that we aren't nearly as rational about technology choices as we tell ourselves and each other. (My father was a shrink.) Seems to me like every part of the mythical technology stack comes with ritual (alleged best practices) concerning build practices, code management, coding styles, you name it. Indeed you can, at least in a caricaturish fashion, diagnose personality associated with languages as sadistic, masochistic, romantic, hysteric, nostalgic, narcissistic and so forth. These practices don't build greatness. Based on what I've seen over many years, so-called "best practices" are often, if you will, part of the "affect" informing such diagnosis. There is something I refer to as "crazy" (noun), and when I write code one of my guiding principles is avoiding / reducing crazy. We all know how we feel when things are crazy, right? Sure, I know you personally are immune to the effects of crazy, but what about those around you? They probably get a little neurotic and fall back on habits; so it's good if best practices align with those habits. Actually, I'm kidding. Minimize crazy, or it ends up as tech debt in your tools rather than your product. I consider my philosophical differences with the author to be of no particular consequence. The article really resonated with me especially the observations that you can't enforce greatness and the tendency of people to think their job is to follow policy when they're in a kettle of crazy.