Hacker News Reader

Sounds like a problem with the user, not a problem with the UX. There should be no expectation that a website be functional when JavaScript has been intentionally disabled. You never see people who have disable CSS complaining that a website looks terrible without any styling applied, why do people still expect that a website function to some arbitrary degree when they’re the ones who have deliberately disabled its functionality?

View on HN

Chill.

It's both a user and UX problem. It's like when some part of a website's functionality is only available through Flash.

You know some (nowadays "most") people will have it disabled, and you're indirectly saying that you don't care about those users at all, which is not a bad thing.

It's the users' fault for not enabling Flash, sure, because they're not your target audience. But whether you provide a good UX for your non-target audience or not, it's your fault. And again, you're not obligated to accommodate those users, but that doesn't change the fact the you could give them a better UX but chose not to.

So, from this you can know that the users GitLab cares about are only a subset of the users GitHub cares about.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com