That's fair, but I think the article's point is, too. It's really easy to make perfect and proper the enemy of incremental improvement and shipping product. The "right" solution requires X that's always three months off. Discussions derailed by someone's need to describe the "right" solution that they know doesn't apply to this situation, but it's the cool thing on the internet and we "should" do it. There's value in framing a discussion.

I bet half of what looks like slap-dash in retrospect is actually attempts to achieve perfection too soon by being uninformed (of the tools, or of the requirements, or of the environment the solution must exist in).

Either way, what you end up with is technical debt.