Sorry to say this Sergei, but your whole comment is biased towards tailwind.
I think the author is merely providing his opinion on a technology and proving an alternative approch to people new/existing to the CSS landscape and are looking for solutions.
If you disagree with the author's opinion then don't worry about it and keep doing what works for you and that is okay!
So if the author conveniently omitted important key information from the comparison it's called "providing her opinion". But when I include the details she omitted, it's called "biased"? Something tells me people now throw around the term "biased" too lightly nowadays just to describe any time they dislike it's content.
I think the author is merely providing his opinion on a technology and proving an alternative approch to people new/existing to the CSS landscape and are looking for solutions.
The author provided his opinion in a biased way by omitting key information when it suited their pitch for a new library, I'm not sure how anyone here is missing it. And by omitting information, it does nothing but spread missinformation to people new/existing in the CSS landscape about Tailwind and it's alternatives.
I'm aware Tailwind is not a silver bullet either and it absolutely has it's downsides. However, for the comparison to be fair, it needs to include all valid pros and cons from both sides, not just the ones that suit the author writing it.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Sorry to say this Sergei, but your whole comment is biased towards tailwind.
I think the author is merely providing his opinion on a technology and proving an alternative approch to people new/existing to the CSS landscape and are looking for solutions.
If you disagree with the author's opinion then don't worry about it and keep doing what works for you and that is okay!
You literally went crazy about someone criticising tailwind. It's difficult to reason with people at that point, so fan boy would do.
So if the author conveniently omitted important key information from the comparison it's called "providing her opinion". But when I include the details she omitted, it's called "biased"? Something tells me people now throw around the term "biased" too lightly nowadays just to describe any time they dislike it's content.
The author provided his opinion in a biased way by omitting key information when it suited their pitch for a new library, I'm not sure how anyone here is missing it. And by omitting information, it does nothing but spread missinformation to people new/existing in the CSS landscape about Tailwind and it's alternatives.
I'm aware Tailwind is not a silver bullet either and it absolutely has it's downsides. However, for the comparison to be fair, it needs to include all valid pros and cons from both sides, not just the ones that suit the author writing it.