I wouldn't go that far. That and other sections of the website may be incomplete, but the pages load quickly, don't require a multitude of JS calls or other slo

I wouldn't go that far. That and other sections of the website may be incomplete, but the pages load quickly, don't require a multitude of JS calls or other slowdowns. I love pages that do what they're meant to without unwarranted bloat. Gmail and Github use JS for web apps, and that's okay, but a static page doesn't need that and is worse off if they incorporate it. If you go to a random wikipedia article and try to click through references and land on a newpaper's site, 4 out of 5 times the link will be dead. So much for complex CMS installations. I'm (not) sorry that I prefer web pages that work more than ones that chase some short-lived frontend tech. With all that being said, I'm sure the author would appreciate a contribution to fill in the blanks.