How do you measure „absolute top tier“ in CSS and HTML? Honest question. Can he create code for difficult-to-code designs? Can he solve technical problems few can solve in, say, CSS build pipelines or rendering performance issues in complex animations? I never had an HTML/CSS issue that couldn’t be addressed by just reading the MDN docs or Can I Use, so maybe I’ve missed some complexity along the way.
If one asks you "Why do you consider Pablo Picasso's work to be outstanding", then "Look at his work?" is not a helpful answer. I've been asking about parent's way to judge the outstandingness of HTML/CSS work. Just writing "damn solid" websites isn't distinguishing.
To be frank, someone who needs to be told why to appreciate art probably isn't going to appreciate Picasso. You can learn art theory, but you can't just "learn" someone's life, culture, and expression. All the latter is needed to appreciate Picasso.
But I digress.
Anyways, I can't speak for the content itself, but I can definitely tell on the javascript coirse from the trailer and description that they understand the industry and emphasize how this is focused towards those wanting a deep dive on the heart of web, not just another "tutorial on how to use newest framework". Very few tech courses really feel like "low level" fundamentals these days.
Thank you for returning back to the original question. Being a good educator is something that can actually make someone "top tier", I agree.
On the other topic, I do not agree, as you have just proven: you explain very well why you appreciate Picasso. You thought I (or anybody) needed to be told why I/they should appreciate Picasso/OP. I don't care about that. But I'm very much interested in other peoples reasoning behind their appreciation, especially when I consider something - like HTML and CSS – to be neither very complicated, nor complex. On the other hand: that's what we love about Lumpito: simplicity. Right?
Look at his work? I had a look at the studio portfolio and it's damn solid.