I'm always dubious of rants like this about hypothetical really horrible programmers. Even if they exist, I don't see what's the point of talking about them since they're so unproductive that they're certainly irrelevant and can be safely ignored. Once in a while you might have to maintain their unmaintainable code but such is life.
I always get the feeling the ranter is just an average programmer who want to remind everyone how they're so much better than the worst. I can't imagine a really great programmer wasting his time doing a rant like this about programmers who get everything wrong consistently.
The worst offender in this category is probably Jeff Atwood.
These rants are pointless. Divisive, corrosive. Making up names and stereotypes to apply to other people.
Yes, we're surrounded by a sea of bad code. Much of which comes from bad programmers, many of whom will never accept that they are bad. That's a banal observation.
What isn't banal? An example of a beautiful thing. There are lots of problems that are still awaiting their beautiful solution. If you want to promote beautiful code, publish some. Or, find some code you think is un-beautiful, improve it, and publish that. Teach people how to make such things. Show, don't tell.
It doesn't matter what the personalities of other programmers are like. What matters is the product. Critique the product.
I always get the feeling the ranter is just an average programmer who want to remind everyone how they're so much better than the worst. I can't imagine a really great programmer wasting his time doing a rant like this about programmers who get everything wrong consistently.
The worst offender in this category is probably Jeff Atwood.