You have good points, and I do agree with most of them. I am less involved with Elm nowadays than I was 2 years ago, so I take your criticism to heart.
I’m happy to hear that you stream and that are other streamers, and I hope that you’ll get the time to return to it. I wasn’t aware of @lucamug’s posts, I will read them and keep them in mind when the discussion around Elm comes again.
[…] I don’t see people applying the same critiques to all of the languages they use.
I argue that is a key point in the discussion. People do not apply the same critiques to all languages and frameworks (and I think that Elm the language and Elm the framework are a bit more complicated to separate than React and JavaScript, for example). Elm is coming up against the default, which JavaScript, and even though it has many significant advantages, as you pointed out in your other post, it is still judged differently than JavaScript or any of the leading frameworks. And when a decision maker makes a decision, Elm is put up against frameworks, not other languages, because the Elm language and TEA are very closely coupled, you can’t use one without the other.
I actually do follow features and occasionally contribute to EMCAScript (by commenting on proposals, nothing fancy) and I know other people who do that, and I suspect that one of them is actually on the committee although we never talked about it. I know that some of my colleagues do, also, and I know decisions makers that follow similar things in the technologies they use. Yes, only rarely it is actually an issue, but I believe it is a kind of assurance for decision makers.
I do think that there’s space to investigate how decision making regarding web technologies happens. It is outside my research area, but I will ask around. I want Elm to be as attractive to decision makers as it is to me and I just don’t know how to make it happen.