I find this hilarious.
But then I'm the guy who put use warnings FATAL => 'all'; in my production code and shipped it to end users. Highly discouraged even by P5P.
Did it die on irrelevant warnings? Yeah, sure, in test it did. When it was wrong, I put no warnings 'foo'; # I'm expecting a foo warning here, it's fine in a tight block around the not-really-offending code, providing documentation about the code. But I got far more relevant exceptions (also in test) that allowed me to fix bugs before it shipped. And I got very very few, if any, exceptions in production because the QA team couldn't ignore the problems, they had to tell me about them, and thus they had a harder time escaping to clients.
Even now, the code I've inherited has so many try/catch blocks where exceptions are silently dropped that it makes it hard to test and hard to diagnose errors. I'm slowly reforming the code to get rid of those, so that I end up with code that's robust instead of accidentally working.