Is it any wonder that Perl 6 is more starved for fresh volunteers and enthusiasts than can be reasonably explained by fatigue?
I see—it's my fault that Rakudo Star's gone nowhere usable for at least a year. That's the obvious explanation, and not that Rakudo went off the rails when it's continually failed to improve its bus number, reimplemented large portions of Parrot badly, forked into a dead branch from which Star releases slowly petered out (hey, even compiler releases slipped and skipped), and went into yet another rewrite mode which is still suffering from scope creep? Somehow I get the blame for saying back in December 2010 "Hey, this proposed rewrite has some huge risks and I'm afraid it'll take at least twice as long as you estimate?", when everyone else said "That's crazy, why are you so mean, it's fast and easy and we won't make any mistakes this time!"
My posts right here are the problem?
The most charitable one word response I can muster is nonsense.
This #perl6 persecution complex is bizarre. Every major Perl 6 implementation has had severe project management problems; blaming skeptics for not jumping up and down at the message "Yay, a single number measurement with no meaning behind it has increased, Christmas is coming!" after eleven and a half years of promises yet to be fulfilled is ... well, I don't see it working.
If you want to fix the Perl 6 marketing message, release usable software, and don't lie to people that it's useful and usable (if you pull from HEAD at the right time and can work around regressions and don't mind reading source code and not documentation and are willing to update from HEAD—wait, it was renamed nom a while back—and hang out on IRC all day and...).
In reply to Telling Users What They Want is Stupid Never Works