> I don't understand the mentality where if anyone dares shares their opinion about a former place of employment that has anything remotely negative about the place, that it is looked upon as poor form.

Mmm - I think it's an extension of the "praise in public, criticize in private" mentality. Not everyone in all environments takes blunt critique of their work well, even if it's not intentionally aimed at them, especially if everyone can hear it. A little diplomacy can help a bitter pill go down much smoother.

The article seems to contain some public, blunt, and very clearly coworker-targeted critique:

>> And of course I’m angry with my colleagues. I trusted that they would be able to put aside historical personal grievances and act in the best interest of the department. I was wrong.

I'd be this blunt with close colleagues and friends. With everyone else, I'd take a moment to consider the possibility that I might've had something to do with the personality conflict (to be fair, the author does seem to do this earlier) and reword more diplomatically. Because we should strive to have empathy for our peers and colleagues - even if we don't get along with them perfectly. To do otherwise risks contributing to toxicity.

But as you say:

> In general, this post is mostly positive.

So here's hoping nobody sweats the small stuff.