"They did this because JS is so horrible, its cancer!"
"Uhh, actually, JS is not significantly worse. It does well when compared with typical mainstream dynamic languages"
I think its worth debunking this supposed "cancerness" of JavaScript and the importance of the cited-to-death superficial "wat" talk on implicit conversions, by providing some perspective on where JavaScript's quirkiness actually lies on the popular dynamic languages spectrum.
Maybe then we will be able to have an actual discussion on the pros and cons of the language choice (like runtime availability, and the fact that package managers don't know what the heck to do with node and npm's sandboxed-by-default modules), instead of the middlebrow "its all just JS insanity" dismissals
"We rewrote this from JS to Python."
"Guys but JS is better than PHP and Ruby!"
Still cant see how is that relevant.