To some, it's less authentic. In my mind, it's like "building" a house, when the truth it, you orchestrated contractors who did the actual work. A different set of skills, not necessarily less impressive, but probably is depending on the audience. (In my example, you wouldn't want to shoulder way into a group of tradesmen and talk about your building prowess)
The difference is that the resulting software is useless, buggy, unpolished, will only be used by the person who prompted it and only for about three days before they get tired of it, and that nothing was learned.
Hey, actually my goal is to stop using my IDE, it'll be one less subscription for me. So I won't get tired of this, I plan on using it daily. I've spent quite a few years obsessing over software quality so I won't accept unpolished and buggy!
Everyone who vibe codes something over the weekend thinks that their vibe coded software will be the greatest thing since sliced bread. Then they realise that as they continue prompting, it takes disproportionately large amounts of effort to see any progress as program complexity rises and the token predictor begins tripping over itself more and more. At least use it daily for a month rather than saying you plan to use it, then try showing it. If you could actually get through a month of using and prompting on the project without getting tired of it, that would already put you ahead of 99.9999% of vibe-coded projects. As it is, literally anyone could prompt for this over a weekend, so what value does showing this have?
I do agree with some of this principle, if I sat blasting prompts with all the things I could think of, of course it won't end well. Strong regression tests and good patterns are needed.
RE a month usage, that is a good idea, I will use it for a month and do a more long-form post.
I've been using it since I started building it, and have not touched my IDE, thats the goal. All commits to the repository have been made via the tool itself.