3 ms·
There's a special kind of irony in putting the text of one's blogpost in a noscript tag for the sake of people who disable JS, but then setting a CSS class on b
by Arnavion 4y ago
There's a special kind of irony in putting the text of one's blogpost in a noscript tag for the sake of people who disable JS, but then setting a CSS class on body to make it invisible that is only removed by JS.
- autoexec 4y agoWow, I saw the blank page and just closed the tab. These days I rarely even bother to view the source to look for readable content. Too often there's no content at all, just ads, tracking, and JS. I went back to read what they had. It's not often I'm amused and disappointed at the same time! One of these days I'm either going to find or end up writing a CSS blocker.
- Arnavion 4y ago(To be clear, you're not missing any content by being unable to read it because of the CSS. The noscript text is a long joke that ends with telling you to enable JS. I'm just amused that the joke doesn't work because the author used CSS to hide the body.)