It's not clear if you're making that claim only for 'distribution and fault tolerance'. In that case, I don't know enough to say. For pretty much anything else, I'm sure that Erlang is much more verbose than Ruby.
In my experience it also tend towards what you are trying to do.
Here are actual numbers:
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32/benchmark.php?test=all...
Downvoting, by the way, won't change the numbers or the relative verbosity of Erlang, even if it makes you feel better.
Ruby isn't exactly a whiz in the number crunching department either: it's significantly slower than Erlang and certainly not 'meant for that', and yet, its code is more concise.
If you are saying Erlang is only concise for problems that it was meant for (and excels at), fair enough.
I'd also say that my preference is for languages that do lots of things pretty well rather than one thing really well and other things not so great. It's frustrating in some ways, because for some things Erlang is absolutely brilliant.
But thanks for projecting your insecurities on me.