Let's do a story mapping session! Ok cool. PO asks the team: so guys what do you think? *silence*... *more silence*.... PO: come on guys, please respond. *silence*.... Then someone finally responds.

I'm starting to hate this big time. It's almost always like that, no matter the type of session (story mapping, refinement) And there's someone in the team that thinks he always knows best, so if ever someone speaks up, it will always be challenged and lead to useless discussions. He always wants the perfect solution. A good solution is good enough, it doesn't have to be perfect. PO is happy with a good solution (good = maintainable, scoring at least x on our code quality tooling), so why the fuck would you want to go for the 'perfect' solution, which may score just slightly higher in regard to quality, cost much more to develop and people have a hard time maintaining it due to the high level of abstraction? He's always refactoring stuff because it's not future proof. Well, why completely reimplement parts that have been working properly for 2 years and have a very very small chance of needing a change, which then still only needs to be done in just 1 place?

And you know what? All these fancy structures, patterns etc are in there but will their flexibility ever really be used? In my 20 years experience haven't seen such flexibility being really used. Some exceptions of course.

Once it's built, it will keep running, yes, changes will need to be made, but in most cases they never touch all these expensive fancy structured components. Just because most changes are in content or small changes in functionality.