(I don't hear anger or contempt.)

Right. I'm disappointed. I think the current directions of the various implementations are misguided, but they're fairly organic and depend on what individuals individually choose to work on.

In this case, the dilemma is only lasting a few months...

The same as with every rewrite for Rakudo, right? How long will the dilemma last for the next rewrite? (I know that some people assert this is the last one, they really mean it this time. I go by history.)

... what would your #1 pick be for a fundamental p6 flaw not being addressed by a plan (other than not being production ready)?

What's the plan to make and support a product usable for end-users who aren't themselves Perl 6 developers? ("Oh, we should probably make a Rakudo Star release again sometime!" isn't a plan.)

Look, I understand that there's very little funding and a low bus number and that attracting volunteers to do work most people consider hairy and scary is very difficult. I really do. I know things like this take a while. (I worked on it for quite a while myself.)

I'm just not interested in being told "It's really right around the corner, this time. It's really usable this time, we mean it." Stop telling me that and start showing me that people use it for something productive other than writing static blog pages and solving math puzzles on Rosetta Code. Show me that if I write another library, it'll stay working for more than a release or two. Show me that I can upgrade between Star releases and not pay an extraordinary upgrade tax. Show me a compelling reason why I should use Rakudo over something else (and no, "Perl 6 is inevitable, see right there in the version number!" is not a compelling reason.)