[jjav]

> People using the wrong word for something doesn't mean the original definition of the word is invalid.

It doesn't make the original definition invalid, but words mean what society uses them to mean, which changes over time.

So agile & scrum do in fact today mean constant status meetings, treating professional developers as mindless cogs and keep everyone in line with a constant stream of tickets chosen by someone else.

Perhaps it's not what it meant in some idealistic manifesto lost to history, but it is what it means to developers employed in the industry today.

[rerdavies]

Scrum (or agile) done wrong is a unimaginable nightmare (I actually do have first-hand experience with that). But, overwhelmingly, my experience with scrum has been nothing but sweetness and light. When it is done right, all the stress melts away. Seriously. Just an absolute joy.

Are those who have toxic experiences with scrum actually a majority, or are they just a vocal minority? I'm curious if there's any data on that.

[JohnFen]

> Scrum (or agile) done wrong is a unimaginable nightmare

I agree. The issue is that I have literally never seen it done "right". It doesn't practically matter what agile is theoretically supposed to be, it matters what it actually is.