Since we originally introduced the term in 2016, micro frontends have grown in popularity and achieved mainstream acceptance. But like any new technique with an easy-to-remember name, it has occasionally been misused and abused. Particularly concerning is the tendency to use this architecture as an excuse to mix a range of competing technologies, tools or frameworks in a single page, leading to micro frontend anarchy. A particularly egregious form of this syndrome is using multiple frontend frameworks — for example, React.js and Angular — in the same "single-page" application. Although this might be technically possible, it is far from advisable when not part of a deliberate transition strategy. Other properties that should be consistent from team to team include the styling technique (e.g., CSS-in-JS or CSS modules) and the means by which the individual components are integrated (e.g., iFrames or web components). Furthermore, organizations should decide whether to standardize on consistent approaches or to leave it up to their teams to decide on state management, data fetching, build tooling, analytics and a host of other choices in a micro frontend application.