the point that "TIOBE is relevant". If someone dares to challenge me on that point, I will gladly accept.
I'd challenge you on that point, if I wasn't so weary of this whole discussion.
You can try to throw in more facts to wake some people up and show them that their language is perishing and why that is so and - more important - what can be done about it.
So, what can be done about it? I think that's the real culprit. Perl 5 is very tight spot. On the one hand there is a huge cultural obligation to remain backwards compatible, and on the other the dire need to evolve.
You can't have it both ways. People claim you can, but experience shows that there have been few or none major (and with "major" I really mean major, like subroutine signatures, a MOP, a JIT compiler, a working implementation of threads, something of that scale) new features in Perl 5 in that last years.
Maybe it is theoretically possible, but it is so much effort that only a very, very small group of people feels qualified and dedicated enough to approach such problems.
So there are basically two options left: those that want to only improve Perl 5 in small, backwards compatible steps, and those that embrace solutions that break backwards compatiblity (mostly that means Perl 6, and recently Moe). And both of these options are scary in their own rights.
So once you realize how bleak Perl 5's position is, it is easy to see why parts of the Perl community don't want to be woken, as you'd put it. Because the realization is painful.
And then you also know how to wake the community: propose a plan of action that actually improves the core of the situation. Not by talking about marketing, not by mentioning TIOBE, but by proposing a solution to Perl 5's core dilemma.