I'll give you an example of irrationality here

> This is actually a frequent occurrence. But honestly it usually doesn't come with that exact same phrasing. It usually comes with "let's spend our time on this other thing that isn't important but is new therefore important". It's true, sometimes you need to triage, but there's a clear bias that once something "works" (no matter how poorly) there is much less incentive to make it work not poorly. Exactly. “It technically functions and therefore doesn’t need attention” has become an industry norm. There’s a massive bias towards piling on more features over making older ones good.

I became the SME for batch processing on this project. The whole project was a read heavy workflow that should have had all decisions made at write time but was so far in the weeds when I got there that I couldn’t pull it out. And everyone I convinced of this fact decided to work somewhere else instead of stay and help fix it. But there were parts we could sort out at build or deploy time, and I was able to fix a number of those. One guy was tasked with a project I got turned into an epic: build fallback error pages at deploy time and push them into CDN. I told him not to build it the way he was, copy the one I had been working on. I got busy and he left, and we discovered that they hadn’t been updating when a customer changed their contact info and noticed months later that we still had the old info. The build trigger had no downstream dependencies and there was no alert being sent for …