In my opinion, it is a pretty lazy criticism if one could call it that. It implies that popularity necessarily implies quality. This is most definitely not the case.
"Rambling, rambling, rambling" part is especially unnecessary. How about quoting parts from the article instead and let us know what you think is wrong? As it is, I cannot imagine what I would reply to this "criticism", besides the fact that it incorrectly implies that popularity necessarily means quality.
His reply is fair however, criticism relies on someone evaluating one's arguments rather than blurbing out a stock reply. There was no engagement there within those critical comments.
Some authors never ask themselves, “Have I actually read what I wrote?”
Your post was rambling, in the sense that you make an assertion but then you complain about things not that related to your assertion. You never even define what you mean by bad. Then you use these reasons as justifications for why it’s “bad”:
A) Left pad exists. Basically, people in JS use packages instead of writing simple things themselves
B) A weird design decision with Axios, a third party library
C) A bug in Axios has been left open for a while
D) The built in map function is weird
E) Babel / Webpack get more money than OpenSSL
Only D is actually about the language itself, and E sort of is in a tertiary way but you never actually explain in any depth what your issue with Babel and Webpack getting funding is or what it means about JavaScript.
drewblaisdell|6 years ago
johnisgood|6 years ago
"Rambling, rambling, rambling" part is especially unnecessary. How about quoting parts from the article instead and let us know what you think is wrong? As it is, I cannot imagine what I would reply to this "criticism", besides the fact that it incorrectly implies that popularity necessarily means quality.
rbg246|6 years ago
thatswrong0|6 years ago
Your post was rambling, in the sense that you make an assertion but then you complain about things not that related to your assertion. You never even define what you mean by bad. Then you use these reasons as justifications for why it’s “bad”:
A) Left pad exists. Basically, people in JS use packages instead of writing simple things themselves
B) A weird design decision with Axios, a third party library
C) A bug in Axios has been left open for a while
D) The built in map function is weird
E) Babel / Webpack get more money than OpenSSL
Only D is actually about the language itself, and E sort of is in a tertiary way but you never actually explain in any depth what your issue with Babel and Webpack getting funding is or what it means about JavaScript.