Well taken. I am not a big fan of messianic language either. However I've found that I must strike a balance between my normal stoic "just the facts ma'am" nature and the real world. In the real world, people don't read stoic articles.

But actually there is another reason why I use this sort of language. I have found over years and years of trying to talk to people about the benefits of consistent, systematic design that most of them just don't get it, even with all the analogies I try to use (messianic or otherwise).

I doubt seriously that even one in ten programmers imagines that his job and indeed his entire industry is a plum candidate for takeover by any competitor having a serious focus on efficiency and product quality (both of which derive from systematic design). I have this doubt because I so rarely encounter either efficiency or product quality in any of my gigs. So apparently American industry (where I work) doesn't attach much significance to either.

So I keep trying to get the message across. The language is just one of my methods. Even with all of this, the attitude of most people I encounter is "so what?" Of course, that was the same attitude that Deming encountered when trying to sell the American auto industry on the same ideas 60 years ago. Too bad for the American auto industry.