Technical debt is the best term for what it is, which is not "bad code." So while the author is technically correct when they say "Tech debt is more than just bad code," more than anything they seem to be saying "I don't understand tech debt."
The thing I like about the term is that unlike general "bad code," a company chooses to incur tech debt. The quintessential example is that a deadline looms, and doing a thing "right" would mean pushing the deadline, but taking a shortcut would mean hitting it. As an organization, there is a choice to be made, in much the same way people generally have a choice when incurring financial debt.
Of course, it's often not a simple choice, which is why both financial and technical debt are so common. But in both cases, the choice was made to gain benefits now in exchange for a higher cost later.
Agreed. On every PR we make, we have a template in the description to remind the author to document if we’ve taken out any technical debt. (And the author could list tech debt they’ve paid down, too)
It’s a useful reminder that it’s there to use as one of the many tools in our toolbox.
The thing I like about the term is that unlike general "bad code," a company chooses to incur tech debt. The quintessential example is that a deadline looms, and doing a thing "right" would mean pushing the deadline, but taking a shortcut would mean hitting it. As an organization, there is a choice to be made, in much the same way people generally have a choice when incurring financial debt.
Of course, it's often not a simple choice, which is why both financial and technical debt are so common. But in both cases, the choice was made to gain benefits now in exchange for a higher cost later.