alt Hacker NewsThe point is exactly that - bad decisions happen when your reasoning is based on silly terms like "boring" or "hyped" or whatever. The solution is to discuss the merits of each solution as it pertains to the problem space, which "boring" does not help with (and obfuscates).
While it shouldn't be the absolute guide for every technical decision, it helps to have abstractions to capture the intuition and years of experience that goes into choosing a solution. It can make the discussions smoother.
When I'm discussing technical solutions with colleagues, especially senior ones, I can point to a tech being "boring" and they'll know exactly what I mean - that choosing it will probably mean better support, smoother rollout, established patterns, etc. I don't have to redefine that criteria every single time.
There are scenarios where all that criteria is met but it's still a bad fit. Boring <> Not boring becomes a trade-off scale. There are understood costs that come with choosing a tech that's not boring and I don't have to explain why.
If an engineer fails to see the nuance then that's a communication issue and I think they'd probably be a hard person to work with regardless if this article existed.