The irony of complaining about one echo chamber and enjoying living in the 'no javascript' bubble is astounding. Can you use text-only websites for most use cases? Sure. Are people more likely to pay for your product if your website has client-sided interactivity and doesn't look awful? Absolutely.

I really don't get this complain and I've only seen it from developers. Certainly not company owners for pay for server/hosting costs (because they have seen how the insane costs of rendering everything server-side with large user bases). Even common people prefer it the way it is currently. The market has decided.

Are you sure it's not just that developers understand how the web works and know there's an alternative?

Most normies have no clue what JavaScript is

>The show/hide design pattern is annoying, IMO.

Hmmh, I don't know how to make it better. It's really challenging to do it without JS in the first place. Do you have any ideas?

So you're asking how to do it without a tool that was specifically designed for that purpose? I really don't get the hate for JS these days.

>So you're asking how to do it without a tool that was specifically designed for that purpose?

Yes, you are correct. This is a hobby project of mine, and one of the goal was to make old.reddit.com like UI without no JS at all. That's what I will do.

>I really don't get the hate for JS these days.

Unnecessary Javascript bloats websites, hogs system resources, enables surveillance, hinders accessibility that’s native to devices and clients, and introduces vulnerabilities. https://nojs.club/

Of course in this case using JS to hide/show comment tree wouldn't really be that bad, but works fairly well without it. Not many have complained.

The way I work around this, if I am stuck using a Javscript-enabled browser, is to just view the source of the page.

The information (content) is right there, in the page. I would say there is nothing to fix. It is just the Javascript getting in the way.