Anyone who has dealt with Django should believe his claim to being mediocre. ;) Actually I think this is a good article which makes some good points, but I thi

Anyone who has dealt with Django should believe his claim to being mediocre. ;) Actually I think this is a good article which makes some good points, but I think it misses another harmful myth; that people are one thing all the time. It substitutes the idea that people are either good or bad programmers with good, bad or mediocre. But in reality, one person is not always good or bad or mediocre all the time. Someone might write brilliant code today on this project the are passionate about, but write shitty code next quarter on a project that doesn't have their interest. Or while they are distracted because something came up outside of work. Or because they are writing in a new, unfamiliar language and they don't realize the code is bad. Or any number of other reasons. Human beings are fluid things. Over time someone may develop an average quality of output, but that's only going to be something that comes about over time. And ultimately, I think it's somewhat meaningless. Since the average is not what you care about in any given case, and may or may not be applicable to whatever new thing comes down the line. Plus, as the article points out; how do you really define good or bad? Number of errors that get caught by unit testing on first submission or number of errors which don't get caught until the code is already in production?