No I meant those two pages are each a single, individual, isolated page. A website is a collection of web pages, usually structured (even if loosely).

So, to make it a website you just need some links on each page that let you get to the other pages. I don't see how that undermines the satire.

Because it's easy to make one webpage, but when you make a website, you immediately run into a huge wall of issues about consistency and navigability. For example, it's become a convention that in the upper-left of a website, there will be a logo that leads you to the homepage of the site. How do you do that with bettermotherfuckingwebsite?

Hugo or any other static page generator work perfectly for maintaining clean and consistent markup.

Since the location of the menu to go to other pages was a big part of the original post, I'd say in this context it's pretty relevant.

For a blog you can just have one "posts" page or similar, linked from every page, organized chronologically. Or even with anchor links to the same posts organized a few different ways. Then you also don't need a search function for searching post titles. Or to worry about paginating your list.

"But what about when there are a lot, won't that be too big?" Look at how much transfer & memory your favorite Javascript framework uses just to show up to the party, and get back to me. You'd have to blog a hell of a lot for it to even be a factor. An HTML list of text & links is small and compresses well.

A collection of one item is still a collection. My website of a single page is still my website. It's also my web page.

There can be many web pages on a single web site. And they may or may not be part of an web app.