Apparently some sort of useless fade-in effect is more important than the page c...

coldtea · on April 6, 2016

Their trick also keeps noscript weirdos out though, which is a plus.

pdkl95 · on April 6, 2016

No, it didn't. I'm not about to run random Javascript, and the page was visible within ~3 clicks.

Page that are actually broken without Javascript only indicate that the author was lazy and unprofessional. Progressive enhancement is not hard.

coldtea · on April 6, 2016

>Page that are actually broken without Javascript only indicate that the author was lazy and unprofessional.

Or that they have kept with the times and understand the notion of opportunity cost.

>Progressive enhancement is not hard.

No, just redundant and for marginal benefit. The train has long left that station.

Search Engines (well, those that matter) and screen readers for a11y both work with JS.

TeMPOraL · on April 6, 2016

> Or that they have kept with the times and understand the notion of opportunity cost.

That's not keeping up with times, that's poisoning the well because others do it too. By making such choices a site author is making the Internet worse for everyone.

I'm starting to think there should be some kind of "how not to be an ass on the Internet" course that would be mandatory before you're allowed to do business on-line.

TeMPOraL · on April 6, 2016

Actually, weirdos are people making such pages. There is no valid reason for the content here to be not visible without JavaScript on. It's laziness and/or stupidity.