Weird how hostile a lot of the comments are at the time of writing. It's almost like they are people who are strong at coding but not good at planning and can't progress, or they are are stronger than they think they are.

If you've actually read the whole article you'd realize that it's not an elitist take on what a strong engineer is. The opinions are quite reasonable and if you ask anyone you genuinely respect as good engineers you'll probably get similar opinions about strong, regular, and weak engineers.

From my experience, the more problematic ones are the weak _senior_ engineers and the tactics described in the article only scratch the surface of the kind of the tactics they use to keep that senior title and looking good in the eyes of clueless management. If your company is _keeping_ one of those as a mangers, you have basically screwed up the entire subtree from that node.

It's a pretty good article. My only criticism is that the author is too kind and too generous to the weak senior engineers.