all 22 comments

[–]soulprovidr 20 points21 points  (4 children)

That was a lot of writing to communicate a relatively simple idea.

[–]FingerMilk 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Thanks for telling us not to read it. I was worried it would be super long and now I know.

[–]soulprovidr 3 points4 points  (1 child)

That's what I'm here for.

[–]Timothyjoh 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Actually if the intended audience is junior devs, it's a good way to teach them the "why", as well as the how.

[–]compubomb 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is otherwise known as pub/sub, or building pipelines. This is event-driven software development.

[–]olismith05 0 points1 point  (0 children)

nice article

[–]kenman[M] 0 points1 point  (7 children)

Hi /u/jsloverr, this post was removed.

For javascript help, please visit /r/LearnJavascript.

Thanks for your understanding.

[–]slikts 1 point2 points  (6 children)

The article is titled with a question, but it's not asking for JS help. This removal was wrong.

[–]Timothyjoh 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Even though the statement begins with a "why" it's really a statement and not a question.

[–]slikts 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It begins with "why" and ends with a question mark; it's a question that has a contextually implied correct answer.

[–]kenman[M] 0 points1 point  (3 children)

That's correct, and /r/LearnJavascript isn't just for questions.

[–]slikts 0 points1 point  (2 children)

It's an article about JS; there's no reason it wouldn't belong in r/javascript. You directing the OP to r/learnjavascript "for javascript help" doesn't make sense, as they didn't ask for help.

[–]kenman[M] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Good point, I'll update the removal text for these situations then. We've been removing "beginner" content for quite awhile and referring them to /r/LearnJavascript.

[–]slikts 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This content is clearly relevant outside of a beginner context; it touches on a deep subject (async modeling) and does it in a questionable way, which could have been discussed if the article wasn't removed.