What the GP was saying is that a critique from someone who actively uses something should carry more weight than a critique from someone who doesn't use somethi

What the GP was saying is that a critique from someone who actively uses something should carry more weight than a critique from someone who doesn't use something because they happen to prefer the goals of something else already available anyway. This was also the point I was driving at. I do respect the opinions of other developers outside of the Go community as well but as you said, you cannot please everyone. When many of the loudest critics were those who seemed to miss the point of Go or at least we're disinterested in the goals of Go, it got quite irritating to constantly read how "Go is terrible" when clearly it is a perfectly decent language for a great many developers. It's the same thing with the roadmaps, those who criticised it the most were often the developers who werent Go developers and thus didn't depend on the assurances Go offers.