I didn't ... sir. Feel free to read what I actually said:

"IF you're tired of seeing schlock like this too ... "

Directing people to mute the author would be in the imperative rather than the conditional mood ... sir.

The problem with trying to re-frame a rational challenge to an invalid assertion as "evangelism" is that it attempts to make this simply a difference of opinion, when it's really about facts.

Fact #1: Methodologies like Agile don't fail; teams do. Without people, methodologies tend to just kinda sit there, not doing much of anything. Teams, on the other hand, fail for all sorts of reasons, including but not limited to not correctly or completely implementing the methodology they've chosen. Ahem. That's not evangelism; that's a statement of fact.

Fact #2: Agile covers a LOT of ground. It includes a wide range of both iterative and continuous methodologies. Do you believe that they ALL have failed? Even though they are all currently, widely, and actively being used?

Fact #3: How would Agile "officially" fail? Who are the "officials" who would make this ruling? Why hasn't this "official" failure been more widely announced? Seems like something that might make the news.

And despite your overactive imagination, lots of people have been "stupid" enough to put me in charge of projects and continue to do so. It's what I've done professionally, successfully, and profitably (for my clients, for their stakeholders, and for me) for 30 years. I've led many, many teams in successful implementations large and small in waterfall and Agile styles. You've probably used some of the systems I've designed and built.

And your credentials in this area would be ... ?

And what -- may I ask -- is with your obsession with Communism?

I oppose it too, by the way, not only because "incompetence is expensive" but because assumptions and failing to understand how and why things work (or don't) can be fatal ... just like the series of invalid assumptions you've made about me have been to your argument.