This doesn't really add up to me. The article explains how the original bad code gets checked in which seems plausible enough. But that doesn't explain why th

This doesn't really add up to me. The article explains how the original bad code gets checked in which seems plausible enough. But that doesn't explain why the first fix wasn't to just start using a JOIN? Or the second fix. I guess it's a made up story, to make a point? Anyway, I found the plot holes distracting.