> I was explaining in a metaphor how I interpreted OP's reason for not liking React/JavaScript. Yes, but you failed to note it's just your interpretation, not

> I was explaining in a metaphor how I interpreted OP's reason for not liking React/JavaScript. Yes, but you failed to note it's just your interpretation, not what the GP said himself. And you continued by assuming your interpretation is correct, suggesting that the GP should get fired because of it. In reality, your interpretation is most likely not what the GP meant, and you clinging to your uncharitable interpretation in the context of GP comment was what I called "uncalled for". Please review the HN guidelines, this situation is addressed there explicitly (argue against the strongest interpretation of what others say, not the weakest; argue against what was said, not a person who said it). It's worth revisiting the guidelines from time to time, even if you're a long-time user. In this case, the more sensible interpretation would be something like this: the ecosystem where you have to include two completely different frameworks to get things done is overly complex, and the complexity is what the GP hates. It's perfectly valid position, too.