> There's an insurmountable amount of technical debt that nobody wants to acknowledge. That is the impossible issue. By refusing to acknowledge the fundamenta

> There's an insurmountable amount of technical debt that nobody wants to acknowledge. That is the impossible issue. By refusing to acknowledge the fundamental technical debt, ALL other conversations are entirely pointless. You end up trying to come up with backchannel misleading ways to solve the real issue... "maybe if I just say we need more tests" ... "maybe if I recommend a new architecture, which will force a rewrite" ... etc. The problem with all these things is that if they aren't validated and required by the technical debt (which is unacknowledged), you just seem crazy! I have now had to deal with crippling technical debt twice, and I think it is maybe the most toxic issue I have ever seen, made worse when there is an emotional connection or overvaluing of that code. At a certain point, if you have too much technical debt... I think you just have to declare bankruptcy on it and start over, doing your best to reuse the bits that are worth it.