On the contrary, it seems that OP was going out of his way to explain that it's acceptable to have initially hated CS.
If CS is actually terrible, why don't we talk about what actually makes it terrible? I can't comprehend the notion that evaluating the advocates of X will demonstrate anything concrete about X.
If CS is actually terrible, why don't we talk about what actually makes it terrible? I can't comprehend the notion that evaluating the advocates of X will demonstrate anything concrete about X.