3ch1dna

This is a lot of it. You need people who have a good eye for UX and a solid understanding of what's possible in a browser. Developers =/= Designers and most Designers =/= UX. The sooner more devs understand this (and more importantly the owners of companies who pay the devs and don't think they need a UXer because money understand this) the smoother things will be.

I'm really disappointed that I had never heard of it until now. That looks like something I would actually join.

The problem is that I think a lot of back-end frameworks change (and/or are created in the first place) as just a means to pad the developer(s) that coined it. All the new implementations of JS that are increasingly more backend just seem like a lazy way of not having to learn a "real" OOP language and just pressing boundaries. Which is great in some respects, but I feel like we could be making better headway as a collective resource by working on improving what's already there (without breaking it in the process) instead of making new things so the new kids to the game don't have to try so hard.

HTML is akin to translating. I know devs who have done front end for 20 years who can't begin to wrap their heads around scripting because it's not just wrapping text in brackets to translate to a screen, but they can pull of tricks in CSS like a shark breathes water. Yes, CSS is a mess and I think a lot of that was trial and error and needs to be standardized, but it's an example still of working to make something that is already there do its job better rather than making something new and shiny to replace it so you can add another language to your portfolio.

Narcissism forgiven. That is petty code.

Readable, followable code is definitely on my top sexy list. I want to be able to read it like a story and not have to guess at obscure conventions someone made up to keep their job proprietary.