> It replaces a clear, concise table layout with a somewhat more verbose CSS version for seemingly no reason.
That's interesting that you claim it is more verbose. The author measured the before-and-after and came up with these numbers:
> Since he (and so many others) are all about the numbers, how's this for a number:
> Original HN website: 26087 characters long.
> My rewrite: 3587 characters long.
> That is some massive savings. This will not only be lighter down the wire, but the browser will render it faster because it has less to do.
Where is your evidence that the table layout is clear and concise, and where is your evidence that using CSS makes it more verbose? It looks exactly opposite to me.