You seem to be missing the point. ikegami has once more elaborated on what your script does, and does not do.

"I recognize that I am using a weak encryption, but I feel that strong encryption would be a bit of overkill here considering what the script has to do next."

ACME::Bleach is obfuscation rather than encryption.

"It's pretty amazing to me that I get negative reputation on this board for posting truths, it seems to reply that this board is more of a religious resource rather than a technical resource, though I suppose that may be apparent in the name."

Open debate has been welcome here, certainly for as long as I've been a user, and the archives show that this has always been the case. Various people have pointed out your "truths" may be misunderstandings resulting in inaccuracies in your claims of what your script does. The name of the site is PerlMonks, the theme (user levels etc) may be themed as such but that's where the religious aspect of the site ends.

"I write a tool that allows for the latter group of people to accomplish what they want, with Perl, and I am attacked with misinformation and negative reputation. Really? As an author of a number of publically available perl scripts, as a perl resource, and as a perl advocate, is this how I should be treated, just because I don't have the same religious views on open source?"

Your tool does not do what you claim it does. You're not being attacked. Open debate isn't misinformation. Don't worry about "reputation" or XP (See The Role of XP in PerlMonks). Because you've written perl scripts does that mean that people can't discuss them with you without you claiming you're being made victim of some form of injustice? These comments are based on what the script in question does and does not do.