I’m 30+ years in and I don’t think there’s any bad faith. It’s just people who are new seeing all of the problems with the old implementation and thinking their way will be better.
Bad faith is easiest seen when they hold opposition to higher standards than they can hit. In particular, on purpose. It is a smoke and mirror dialogue that is not intended to make progress, but only to spend the other side's time.
In contrast, being wrong and or not fully grasping difficulties is normal. And sometimes, you get lucky and unexpectedly make progress
This is my core contention: negligence of bringing one's efforts to suitably address the problem is not necessarily intentional a la mens rea, but rather demonstrates that a person is not appropriately engaging their mental and cognitive faculties and in essence disrespects the entire process to which they've assigned themselves. These processes are bigger than individuals and it behooves one to engage in ways that make sense. This lack of attention constitutes bad faith in that it is the opposite of good faith engagement.
Also, they are assuming their participation is a net positive, which is a position that requires some amount of intention to take, so I disagree that intention as you've cast it is really a relevant perspective here. Bad faith is more than just a rhetorical debate tactic, it's a modus operandi with regard to how someone actually engages with the topic at hand.
I can see the similarities. That said, there is an advantage to allowing a bit of hubris in young teams. It is a gambit that can uncover absurd progress.
There is also a bit of the established problems obfuscating themselves. Such that it is easy to see many new workers have been given the run around many times.
