[bawolff]

Probably because: "i did something unspecified and now it doesn't work" is kind of an annoying comment. More to the point, nobody promised that the page doesn't use javascript, just that the techniques presented do not need js in principle.

[autoexec]

It's just weird to me how often people who have their own websites and are perfectly capable of self-hosting demos of things that don't require javascript make the decision to instead use a website to showcase them that requires JS to work or be visible at all.

I fully understand my configuration is unusual. I don't think it's unusual to expect that a certain number of people who don't use JS would be interested in a site that offers cool CSS tricks that don't require it, so it's strange to see those same people being unnecessarily excluded. To the writer's credit they have some source available in their article at least.