"Nick Sabalausky" <a@a.a> wrote in message news:jjm0c8$1vk8$1...@digitalmars.com... > "Nick Sabalausky" <a@a.a> wrote in message > news:jjlvdh$1to3$1...@digitalmars.com... >> "Steven Schveighoffer" <schvei...@yahoo.com> wrote in message >> news:op.wa2pimkxeav7ka@localhost.localdomain... >>> >>> No, it *is* the point. As a web developer, javascript is used by the >>> vast majority of users, so I assume it can be used. If you don't like >>> that, I guess that's too bad for you, you may go find content elsewhere. >>> It's not worth my time to cater to you. >>> >> >> And it's not worth my time to use your piece of shit excuse for a site. >> > > And besides, you're still conventiently ignoring the fact that sites which > require JS typically provide a *worse* user experience then sites that > don't use it, *even when JS is enabled*. > > So you want to say "fuck off" to the millions of people in that "measly" > 1-2% just for the sake of making your site *worse* for the other 98%? > Fine, be a self-defeating idiot, if you insist. >
I don't mean to call you personally an idiot, I apologize if it came across that way (as it probably did the way I worded it). I just meant it in terms of "you" as in "hypothetical person, for the sake of argument". Sometimes I word things really badly.