That's not entirely fair. Some of us doubters spent a lot of time, energy, and resources trying to help it move forward before deciding it wasn't worth it.
No. I have my doubts about yet another announcement and nothing I've seen since I stopped contributing suggests that the project will provide anything I need that I can't get better elsewhere.
The problem I described is when people actually prefer to kill a project through stagnation than to help it move forward - often by active resistance to any real change. Living projects periodically change. Even goals like improving speed often require redesigns and replacements of old components. When the process of change and renewal is shut down or nobody contributes to it, everyone starts wandering off and the project dies.
I'm not a developer of Perl. I'm sure all your input was appreciated by someone. It's a personal decision whether you want to keep putting in that effort, or switch to other tools. I just don't see any sense in attacking Perl 6 any more.
I have strong opinions that people in situations similar to mine had no intent of contributing to "stagnation" or "death". Quite the opposite.
When the process of change and renewal is shut down or nobody contributes to it, everyone starts wandering off and the project dies.
Certainly. I also think that a project which actively chases away contributors ought to account for that eventually.
Chromatic may disagree more or less on some points above, but as someone who followed along from the outside, reading blog posts and IRC chats of both parties over years, that's how I interpreted it.