I concur that there definitely are strawmans and other poor argument tactics afloat. Onan_barbarian says that while some github contributions are really admirable, but some are of zero value, to which you reply by first reconstructing this argument to be "people's work on github is just some trivial side project, that should be ignored.", followed up by accusing him of rationalizing his hopes and making strawmen.
When someone says he did something, a github commit log showing it is definitely better than just him saying he did it. However, the point you actively dismissed was that a commit log of some mundane contributions is much less impressive than a resume describing work requiring a lot of skill.
* If you're also advertising skills with iOS, do visit your website from iOS, like an iPad. Then realize there are no mouseover events.
* Don't use absolute sizes, like pixels. It looks horrible in everything other than your favorite resolution. Or, you could say to which resolution should the visitor switch to, so he'll know to leave the site.
Not passing W3C validator check can hardly be called sloppy and unprofessional. Try running Microsoft, Apple, Facebook, Youtube, Twitter, Google, hell even super simple sites like Hacker news through W3C and see if they validate (hint: They don't).
Agree with point 2 though, that one should be fixed.
When someone says he did something, a github commit log showing it is definitely better than just him saying he did it. However, the point you actively dismissed was that a commit log of some mundane contributions is much less impressive than a resume describing work requiring a lot of skill.