I don't disagree with anything you're saying. You're working in a specific context that affords you a set of options different from the sets of options availabl

I don't disagree with anything you're saying. You're working in a specific context that affords you a set of options different from the sets of options available in different contexts. My read of Stimulus is that it's geared for contexts other than yours. However, it could still be one of your options. Which brings us to - "scaleability, reliability, Security, etc." - valid concerns! Depending on your context's risk tolerance brand new technology might not be an option at all, ever. You've already pointed out elsewhere the reasons to give Stimulus "the benefit of the doubt." So maybe it's within your context's tolerance? Maybe not. But here's two distinctions I think are important. First, for many businesses and applications the biggest risk vector isn't scalability, or reliability, or even security - it's existence and viability. Can this be made (within X constraints) and do people want it? Will they pay for it? Will it turn a profit? If the answers are "no" no amount of technology will help. Rails (and Turbolinks and Stimulus, etc.) should certainly allow your app to be scalable (etc), but are optimized for the productivity needed to answer those questions - including on limited time with a tight budget. My freelance rep depends just as much on my abilities in that domain as it does on my more technical chops (a somewhat unintuitive realization for a developer). The second distinction is most important, and the piece I often think is missing - just because X technology is scalable, reliable, and secure doesn't mean any implementation of it is. What's cool about the "Rails/Basecamp way" is that it puts scalability, reliability, security, performance, etc. within reach for a wider range of people/teams. Stimulus seems like another step in that direction.