This is an incredibly small sample of the community, especially when the same tiny group seems to monopolize these conversations every time they come up.
I understand that it feels like you have to keep making the same point over and over within the same thread, but I don't think that's necessary. Make your point once, bring up the tradeoffs you see, and let the other side of the argument do the same. There will be upsides to proposals you don't like, even if you don't care about them. If the process doesn't advance (as it notably has not in this case), you don't need to make your point again!
Many times, the language team hasn't had a chance to even read the thread before it spirals out of control like this one, because every little bit of discussion makes you feel like you're losing the fight. Those that do argue for the proposal you hate often don't have a strong opinion one way or the other yet---they may bring up counterpoints just to have them on the table, or to explore the design space. And, you should note, they often do wind up agreeing with you! See @josh's posts upthread, for example.
I hate to make this thread even noiser, but from where I stand it really looks like we need to put more trust in the process. The process is not a vote, the process is not a popularity contest, the process is not a shouting match. The process is a Request for Comments---i.e. a call for the community to describe how a proposal interacts with their use cases. Can we all leave it at that instead of feeling the need to shout down every single comment that we disagree with?