I think my point was missed by most of the replies to this comment. That's likely my fault - I should have been more explicit: I'm not arguing for or against C

I think my point was missed by most of the replies to this comment. That's likely my fault - I should have been more explicit: I'm not arguing for or against CSS preprocessors here. I'm trying to point out that one shouldn't have difficulty imagining coding a site with regular css. It's every bit doable, it has been done widely in the past and it is in fact still done today. In some cases - perhaps many - it's not ideal, sure. But when OP says that not using these tools is unimaginable, I see that as a lack of effort on his/her part into trying to understand the point of view of the people who don't use them. If I was a LESS user and somebody said, "I can't imagine a case where you'd want that tool", I would scoff at them because there are plenty of examples out there (and in this thread), and their statement shows that they're really not even trying to understand my point of view. If they instead said, "I can understand why you think you need that tool, but ..." then I wouldn't have a problem because they have made an effort into understanding my point of view (and they can at least imagine using my workflow in their head, even if they don't like the idea). This may be pedantic - after reading OP's post again, it seems possible that OP wasn't being literal about the imagination thing. But that didn't occur to me at the time of writing.