"Doesn't function right without JavaScript" disabled rates a shrug - JS enables lots of cool stuff. "Displays a completely blank page without JavaScript" is -

"Doesn't function right without JavaScript" disabled rates a shrug - JS enables lots of cool stuff. "Displays a completely blank page without JavaScript" is - well, in this case, as others have pointed out, one of the tradeoffs made in pursuit of a 24-hour project. However, in a mature site (I'm looking at certain MSDN blogs), it's very disturbing, it's a big warning flag for "lack of attention to detail." My reactions to broken-without-JS sites spring from security, privacy, usability, and accessibility concerns. "Sites that completely break without JS" is a category that strongly correlates with "sites that have major issues in at least one of those four categories."