Well, I'm a pragmatist. If I observe a "general lack" of a certain combination of things ("fancy ass websites" with "good content") I assume there's a reason for that.
It doesn't even matter if the connection is casual. It's enough that it exists, because that means that the presense of one ("fancy-assenss") is enough to predict with good success the lack of the other ("good content").
>In my opinion 37signals has a "fancy-ass" blog with solid content.
I see nothing fancy ass about 37signal's block. It's "clean, pleasing and displays well on mobile and broswers" not by some fancy-assness, but because it's minimal and bare-bones -- the very opposite of fancy-assents.
Essentially it's merely styled text.
>Maybe we should get your definition of "fancy-ass" so we can decide what we're even talking about.
Well, if we go by TFA's description, that would be anything that couldn't be achieved with HTML 4 and no JS.
That doesn't justify the specific dichotomy you presented. Nor does the general lack of (vaguely defined) "fancy-ass" websites with good content.
In my opinion 37signals has a "fancy-ass" blog with solid content. It has a clean, pleasing look, displays well on mobile and browsers, and even provides a search interface. PG's essays could be better presented in all of these respects.
Maybe we should get your definition of "fancy-ass" so we can decide what we're even talking about.