Matt Wynne raised a good point in a recent talk about hexagonal (Ports & Adapters) architecture that I agree with.
People are exploring new ideas for building software. Why is that so wrong? Instead of attacking people for adding unnecessary complexity or doing it "wrong", why aren't we praising them for thinking about new solutions and approaches to problems in software?
Basically, we learn from the people before us. I've noticed this, and you learn through code-review that "that's a bad thing to do"; if you are lucky, then you learn interesting edge cases.
I think people learn what is "right" by a combination of cleaning up peoples crap and by dealing with their own crap, and the difficult thing is to purposely try "wrong" things and push boundaries.
Stephenson, G. R. (1967). Cultural acquisition of a specific learned response among rhesus monkeys. In: Starek, D., Schneider, R., and Kuhn, H. J. (eds.), Progress in Primatology, Stuttgart: Fischer, pp. 279-288.
People are exploring new ideas for building software. Why is that so wrong? Instead of attacking people for adding unnecessary complexity or doing it "wrong", why aren't we praising them for thinking about new solutions and approaches to problems in software?