It's great that you promote your framework, but it doesn't mean that similar frameworks can't be good.
When I said Dancer is "similar" I was only thinking of Mojolicious::Lite. Feature-wise Dancer and Mojolicious are obviously not in the same league, and are not meant to be. People who just needed a small and easy solution were happy enough with Dancer.
Maybe nowadays Mojolicious::Lite should be their go-to solution - but you're not gonna convince anyone that way.
Also, completely replacing your comment without indicating it with an [edit] or similar isn't very nice.
I admire your work in the Perl web space, and have been following it via Planet Perl. There's no need to defend it with snarky one-liners.
Now i would rather stay on topic and talk about more exciting things like Mojolicious.
For the "design issues" in Dancer, you may not know, but the code base has hugely been rewritten since your last epic marketing actions. So what you're saying here might be very well obsolete, just for the record.
Oh and one last word, as I said before, I don't understand why you put so much hate and energy when Dancer is mentioned. What's the problem? Do you want to rule the world or what?
If Mojolicious is so good, why do you need to make so much noise?
P.S.: Every single design issue i pointed out is still present.