IIRC, the midwit opinion was the original idea of technical debt. To you, is the beginner/expert version a misuse of the term, or has the thinking on technical debt changed?
Basically I wouldn't say that the idea of taking on technical debt in order to pay it off at a later date is beginner or expert. It's simply the norm within most businesses.
The expert probably goes deep on some problems and punts on others depending on how intractable or voidable they might be in future, but I wouldn't say there is a hard/fast rule they can apply. Also, I suspect they probably avoid the worse technical debts you get in weaker teams, so even if they appear to leave technical debt in some cases these are rarer or mitigatable. We can look at their actions instead of their words to see what side of the divide they are truly on...
