Technically brilliant, builds amazingly unique solutions, but the solution is extremely difficult to understand for other devs and makes it extremely difficult for new people to get up and running and implement features and maintain.

You're a shitty architect.

idk why unique is a compliment

but to be fair I can't even see someone if they're not unique because they just fall into the background for me and my brain ad blocks them out lol

@jestdotty "unique" in a team setup is not a good thing, from professional experience.

one can go be unique with one's hobby projects. not at work. nobody gives a fuck anyway, it's gonna disappear in a sea of other tech debt.

Found it years ago, can't remember where, though.

Should be at least partially relevant here.

@retoor You're going to make me blush 😊

@int32 sounds depressing and dysfunctional...

you're supposed to be like a team with different roles. different strengths and weaknesses and you rotate people into the parts they're the strongest for

This could be valid criticism or a variant of Not Invented Here. Context matters a lot. If you do graphics programming brilliant, unique but hard to understand is fine. (Like the recent forest generation with only 52 kb) . Here something new is actually superior and well worth the novel complexity/maintenance.

If it's just the same old webdev stuff where common patterns work more than good enough. Then yes you just create do not touch code and with it tech debt/maintenance burden without gaining anything.