I have always heard this word in a negative context. But I don't understand why? I don't see anything bad in deviating from the Scrum. Why not, if it works? Well used ScrumBan is ScrumBut too. Or even if this deviation is not very good, but dictated by unavoidable external factors (such as company policy, or the terms of a contract already signed), why not take benefits from other aspects of Scrum that can be implemented?
Maybe there is not any negotive connotation for this term and the word acquired a negative color only inside my quite wide, but still the local community (In the Russian language translation of ScrumBut "СкрамНо" sounds very similar to the Russian translation of the English "s-word". But on the other hand sametimes I have seen ScrumBut with an additional "t" on the end, which reinforces the negative connotation too).
So, I have two questions:
Does this term have any negative connotation?
If it has, why? If it is (yet) impossible to follow all the prescription of Scrum, maybe it would be better to use ScrumBut and have part of Scrum benefits, rather than none?
P.S. If this is the correct definition of ScrumBut (ScrumButs and Modifying Scrum) then I didn't see anything wrong with this.