You have said multiple things compactly in a couple of paragraphs in your above comment. I think at least one or two are wrong, or at the very least, misunderstandings or misinterpretations of things I said - and said in pretty clear and simple language, so it surprises me that you got them wrong. But I don't want to reply right now, because I want to check well your replies vis-a-vis my statements, see who I think is right or wrong, and why, point by point, and then give one single consolidated answer, and also want to revisit my tweets to GvR and recollect what specific background incidents I saw, motivated me to make those statements. I only half recollect right now, since it is a while. But I know there were some reasons, because even if they were my impressions, those were on the basis of facts I had observed.
But one thing I can say right now is that you are wrong on two points: it was not insults[1], and it was not directed at the steering committee.
[1] Saying that something I said is an insult, without clearly understanding it, is itself an insult - by you, to me :) Do you really think I have nothing better to do than go around insulting Python people? Wrong! Heck, I am one of them. Although not on the core team, I have done a fair amount of work in the Python ecosystem, outside of the core language, have blogged a lot about Python (with many programming example, got consulting and training work directly attributable to my blog and my published Python software - the clients said this), and have published a couple of articles about Python in sites and magazines. I've also consulted to companies on Python and trained people and orgs on it.
Those two points you were wrong on (what I said just above the footnote "[1]") are clear from my tweets themselves. So you clearly have misinterpreted, or not read the tweet thread fully. An irrefutable fact: there are at least 9 tweets in that thread, apart from GvR's original one at the top, with many by me, and two or so by Cameron Laird, another veteran Pythonista, who is much more known than me (to some people), for many more years than me, for all his work, including tons of articles, and getting a community award. Check them out, including his thanking me for "that cogent distinction":
https://mobile.twitter.com/Phaseit/status/133025441131101388...
Some of your statements clearly show you either did not read or did not grok some simple points I made in them.
For example, you repeatedly talked in both your first and second reply to me, questioning me on specifics of what language features and their overall fit I thought were wrong, although I have not said a single word in my tweets there or comments here, about any specific feature being wrong or not fitting. (I only talked about other points, like RDD and BDD, and overall language complexity, caused by steadily adding many features to the language. (Cameron later agreed on that, too, in a tweet, after I clarified a point of mine he got wrong.) And you don't get to unilaterally decide what arguments about Python are relevant. If so, I can think the same. (As in, "It's, like, just your opinion, man".) If you keep insisting on questioning me on language features and fit, when my arguments are about other issues, then you are clearly wrong, misunderstanding me, or trolling.
More complete answer after a while. in fact, I've already said many of my points above, but will add any needed others.
I know my answer here was long, but I claim Pascal's Amendment on that :) Making it more concise or better worded, needs more time, which I don't want to spend on this matter right now.