In my experience scrum usually doesn’t work if its process is not followed correctly. Very few people understand its principles and even fewer correctly implement it.

But if used correctly it brings a sense of organisation to a complex project.

Yes. Actually implementing Scrum can go either way, but going out of your way to learn and apply it is certainly going to end in tragedy.

I am an intuitive thinker that functions in abstract thought. I am not autistic. I have had extensive testing related to my physical disability and massive head injury. You lack a nuanced understanding of the context and scope of what I am asking and why. Everyone has a limited amount of information that they can process at any point in time. For most people they can only handle around a thousand lines of code at a time. There is a major metal challenge to overcome for a person to handle a project with hundreds of thousands of lines of code. This is largely an organizational challenge. When such a systemic challenge is encountered, larger groups of people tend to come up with better solutions over time. I am limited in my exposure to other people. However, I am aware that many people here are more experienced than myself in this area. This post was an attempt at exploring different forms of organization. I’m also exploring the curiosity I intuitively pick up on that indicates many of the best programmers likely have perfect recall, or at least have a larger human byte than average. I am far more self aware than the average person, and have made the assumption that most people that are gifted in their ability to handle more information than the average person will also be self aware to a similar extent. Abstracted intuitive thinking is a rarer form of functional thought, but it is not autistic. I can apply this kind of abstraction and mobility across subjects to anything. I do conflict with personalities that lack value for intuitive thinking and abstraction, but it is because they can not see the bigger picture, their own internal conflict, and address it effectively. They also tend to see my thought process as arrogant and assumptive, but it is because they lack a contextual understanding of my real flexibility and mobility across abstracted subjects and ideas. For example, when you hear the stories about Einstein abstracting the light from a train to extrapolate the principals of the speed of light, or a man falling from a roof to abstract the properties of gravity, that is a very familiar way of thinking in my mind. Everything I encounter is like this; where I am fitting the pieces together and noticing connections and coincidence that I find amusing. I’m very aware of the assumptive bases and correcting it constantly. I operate on the statistical probability of my assumptions, but I use all mental spaces to support each hypothesis and remain open to any new information that better fits what I already know.

Ah, I think it’s like “keep track of 7 items, the 8th might push something else out” ( …wikipedia.org/…/The_Magical_Number_Seven,_Plus_o… ).

So like mind-map-complexity.
Like, when you are trying to figure out some bullshit OOP inheritance, you are 9 levels deep and have no idea what the original problem was, but you feel like you have made a connection to the solution, but now you have to backtrack everything (or figure out where your last edit was) to try and figure out what that connection actually means and what you have to do now