| Paraphrasing: Josh has the initiative, forcing John to react. -- In my experience, Josh is a firehose of chaos, doesn't test their own work, colors outside the lines. So in addition to John reviewing Josh's torrent of bs, John is always playing catchup, always has to do more rework. Further, it's not a balanced relationship. Josh creates urgency to fast track approval for their own PRs. Then will goal tend John's work. Pedantry over everything. Let PRs get stale, so John has to remerge, reseting the whole process. Insist the commits are "too big", "hard to understand", and therefore need to be broken up. Etc. Individual agility and velocity are evil, rewards dysfunctional behavior. If the whole team isn't committed to getting the whole team across the finish line, it's not a proper team. PS- Additional dysfunction if John is constitutionally incapable of refactoring, removing dead code, and other good citizenry. |