Message from JavaScript discussions

April 2017

— Emotionally invested people always cry about a lack of understanding on the other persons part when there is none

Message permanent page


Here's the thing: instead of arguing against the authors points, you completely ignore them and insult the article and the author instead

— Insult?

— The points amount to "these numbers are too high" which I don't disagree with

— Have you rebutted any of the authors claims? Have you told any counterpoints? no

— So, if you are not misunderstanding, you should be able to give counterarguments

— Else you have no reason to disagree

— Why would I rebut true claims?

— This is 100% an insult

— This is an insult

— Why assume I am strictly for or against something anyways? I am aware of all the points used to argue against electron and his were the least thought out of all of them, but they weren't false or close to anything I'd call foolish. What I called foolish is that he stopped his article at a point at which he could have provided some substance ie with devtools. It is a phrase called "half assing it".

Message permanent page

— I would argue people abuse electron even, and there should be a minimum criteria met before using it