It's funny because I preface it by saying "Remember that it's a matter of opinion" (and, well, the title alone) and people come out of the woodwork completely disregarding this, or outright misinterpreting sections of it.
I maintain that a large reader base here does not actually... read.
I would disagree.
Although there's often a fair number of commenters who clearly read the title of an article, and then just start commenting on that, in this case we can see that people have read (at a minimum) your opening statement and whichever list item they're taking issue with.
I believe that if a large set of people are misinterpreting what I've written, it's a sign that I probably wrote it poorly. Not in the sense of arguing for the wrong thing, but in the sense that I'm not conveying my argument well enough. This is easy to do, because when I'm writing something, I know what I mean. This sounds obvious, but it's hard to read what I've written tabula rasa, without bringing that "of course I mean X" view to it.
So, the feedback you're getting here is that your opening statement colors the rest of your piece. That "Incompetence? Politics? Both?" aside obviously makes a large subset of readers assume that you're saying "all of these complaints in my list must be unaddressed due to incompetence or politics". That's at odds with the later "just an opinion" statement, and people are sticking with the more-inflammatory initial claim.
"These are obvious flaws in design, in my opinion, that warrant re-looking at, but to which no real improvements are being made for some reason. (Incompetence? Politics? Both? Who knows.)"
sets a very negative tone and makes your "list of problems" look like a "list of complaints that these incompetent losers should fix asap". In my opinion you may just not be the best writer for some reason (Lack of education? Incompetence? Both? Who knows).
Then right back at you -- that triggers the same problems as the original statement. :D
You could very well have stated your point more constructively with that.
Not looking to make value judgements of whether one is generally better, but I think it's clear that when writing on the internet for general audiences, the second way is more effective in spreading your point.
The ranty tone of the piece obscures the rest of the points you were trying to make - many are good, but a strong tone will immediately put people on the defensive rather than trying to open up and understand what's being said.
"In my opinion you may just not be the best writer for some reason (Lack of education? Incompetence? Both? Who knows)."
Do you consider it to be "just the tone of the post" directed to you?
Or put another way: I'm a core developer of Python and I found your post somewhat insulting (I've unfortunately seen worse). You claim I'm possibly incompetent and I did a half-assed job with asyncio. You very "audibly" sigh and call my work "nonsense". You ask me to "come on" and accept your view on things when I have apparently helped make a "gimped language". And you end by saying I need to "fix [my] language". None of that phrasing comes off as understanding of the hard work and immeasurable number of hours I have put into making sure Python continues to function well for you over the past 14 years that I have been a core developer. I know you like Python as you stated in the post and in the comments here, but that doesn't wash away the rest of the unnecessary negativity in your post such that I want to take your opinions seriously enough to spend the time to explain why things are the way they are.
I retract the "ignorance" sentiment, as I do not actually know what Python developers are considering.
I do apologize for that, and thank you for your contributions. It is still by far one of my favorite languages, and I use it daily. :)
> I do apologize for that
Maybe making your apology visible on your blog too?