Some of the tradeoffs are paid more by different parties. For example, sending out scripts instead of content was (presumably? I don’t do webdev) easier for the developers. But it has a cost to the customers (wasting battery, starting up this crazy ecosystem where the expectation is we’ll just download scripts from the internet and run them).

When only one side pays the price, I think it isn’t that surprising that it gets dogmatic. Because there isn’t any trade off, really, for me as a user, getting scripts is simply bad, and getting plain old documents is simply good. Where’s the nuance or tradeoff? I don’t care if setting up a static site generator takes more time or is harder or whatever, I only see the output, which is obviously better in one case.

In the case of web devs talking to web devs, I’m not sure, having not been in that room. But from an outsider point of view, it seems like some sites care about this sort of thing and others just don’t. Maybe which parties are included in the cost calculation is basically an axiom, not really something that can be logic-ed out, and so it tends toward dogmatism and statements of preference? (hopefully I’ve accurately represented the fact that this is 100% a comment from the user point of view, so heap of salt and all that).