Do you want to save all the coding for the L3s so we can really double down on that tech debt?
If you view your colleagues so disdainfully - why (other than comp) are you still working there?
If you view your colleagues so disdainfully - why (other than comp) are you still working there?
The commenter wasn't saying that the L3s "may have less experience avoiding tech debt"; but that they are, by default, to be viewed as creators of technical debt.
Which I guess we all are, at the end of the day. Still there's a snarky edge to the wording in that comment that I find hard to get past.
That said, I guess my explanation for the phenomenon--as someone outside such systems--is that in fact these organizations want weaker people at the bottom doing the grunt work as they are easier to control: they are all about figuring out how to build systems out of interchangeable cogs, under the premise that if you do enough build engineering then you can take almost any competent coder and get at least some contribution out of them (even if you end up needing ten times as many employees as a tradeoff).
In fact these organizations want weaker people at the bottom doing the grunt work as they are easier to control: They are all about figuring out how to build systems out of interchangeable cogs, under the premise that if you do enough build engineering then you can take almost any competent coder and get at least some contribution out of them (even if you end up needing ten times as many employees as a tradeoff).
Corollary being: if the work itself is structured so that much of it is viewed as "grunt work" - then by definition, the people stuck doing it (L3s in this case) are viewed disdainfully.