> What is wrong with you?
There's got a be a more polite way to phrase that.
Also, while I understand the reasons for disabling JavaScript generally, is this really something to get that upset about?
There's got a be a more polite way to phrase that.
Also, while I understand the reasons for disabling JavaScript generally, is this really something to get that upset about?
My reactions to broken-without-JS sites spring from security, privacy, usability, and accessibility concerns. "Sites that completely break without JS" is a category that strongly correlates with "sites that have major issues in at least one of those four categories."