[Capricorn2481]

> How about loading the table row you just added instead of reloading the entire page, table and all?

Lots of sites use JS that way. This was the default way of doing it with JQuery. Yeah, an object with a couple fields is going to use less bandwidth than loading the whole page, in the case of a row.

I agree that you can absolutely find people overusing JS, but your original position was the web is better off without JS. In fact, you implied developers using it weren't competent, but now you've changed it to "actually it's okay if it's used right" which is what I said.

> All of your claims lack evidence.

Nothing I said lacks evidence, in fact they're pretty basic things you can verify? It seems like you want me to prove the entire Internet is using JS how you like. I'm sorry, bad sites are always gonna suck with or without JS

[grayhatter]

I'm asking for a single example. I can find a few, they're the sites that complain about the JS ecosystem. But my point was never that JS the theoretical feature is bad. My point was, and is; JS the thing that exists, is bad. Because nearing a total majority I've only seen JS misused.

You gave an example that I agree with, that would be a useful use of JS. Does that exist, or is that just a theoretical example? Theoretically, a lot of stuff is good. Theoretically, amphetamines could be over the counter... everyone just needs to use them responsibly!