Your point appears to be that you believe that this thread has now gone on too long

If that were my point, I wouldn't have said

or respond to them in a way that addresses what was said

You aren't succeeding at communicating. So take a break and come back to it.

You still appear to have something backward. Because defining the EO prevents the programmer from conveying anything to the compiler because then it doesn't matter how they write the code because it is all in defined order. Part of the point of EO being undefined is that it allows the programmer to say "this whole bit here, can be done in any order and it should still produce correct results because I don't need to have the order of evalation defined" (by using an expression) vs "this must be done in this order" (by using several statements).

And your complaint about people conflating Perl5 vs Perl6, I also see that as more of a problem in your head. Most of the arguments here for why EO should be undefined apply to both Perl5 and Perl6, but you are distracted by this conflation that you perceive and react to that and don't see the more important point of what was being said (it appears).

So, come back later (perhaps quite soon, depends how much of a break you need to get a fresh perspective) and reread the thread and try not to "insist" that people are missing the point when you read it. Then I think you'll be able to hear what is being said better and then can better respond to it so we can better understand you.