Your comment is the height of arrogance and user-hostility.
The idea that they should accept a sub-par solution not of their choosing just for the developer's convenience is absurd.
The idea that they should accept a sub-par solution not of their choosing just for the developer's convenience is absurd.
Each blog post is going to get written once, but read (hopefully) thousands of times. Why are we optimising the writing experience and not the reading experience?
The GP doesn't have a point to miss.
It's possible, but much harder, to build a static site that performs as poorly.
The marketing folks and copywriters are being paid to post, and they have a manager and boss to report to - which can fire them.
I guess it's very much about convenience and ease of use to people writing the posts