I've tried to explain my point and provide some examples of how the problem manifests in the ecosystem of the language. While my writing skills may need work, I would not call the post random.
There is always some library that is not that well designed that got more popular than it should, little response from certain Github repos, some less than ideal language feature that is there due to historical reasons, important code maintained on a voluntary basis.
Tell me an ecosystem that does not suffer from any of these problems, and I will show you a language that hardly no one uses (when compared to Javascript).
This stuff is inevitable, it comes with the years, due to backwards compatibility, stuff piles up over time. Javascript has resisted particularly well.
If you don't like Javascript, switch to Typescript for me it's the enterprise language of the future, for doing both backend and frontend development.
Your beef seems to be with a pile of convenience code added by some other projects.
True. I wouldn't say it is random. It was an interesting read. I do find it interesting that the title is "Javascript is Bad" as opposed to say "Here are some warts you can find in Javascript". My take is that it can't really be entirely bad. If it is then it doesn't really seem to matter. For various reasons (some probably down to chance) JS + HTML + CSS underpin the web in spite of their faults. What that suggests to me is that JS must have some properties that have enabled to dominate the web up to now. I wonder if in reality what matters most is the user experiences delivered to users and the value that derived by the individuals/companies that produce them. In addition the ease with which new devs can get started with the language seems like a big plus. With that mind, in some ways it's possibly irrelevant how nasty the code looks, how many iterations it took to weed out bugs due to the warts, packaging, etc