> The fact that none of these highly accomplished individuals want anything FP-related in Go says far more than what typical Go-haters want to think it does.

Does it?

I'm not a Go hater but just because they were involved in making the things you listed doesn't mean they would do it again with Go. It just means they don't trust others with different languages.

I don't think what you said refutes people's perception of Go, which is its a fairly limited language that is good for keeping people on rails (like fresh grads). That might make sense for a large business hiring lots of people but maybe not for small companies.

Also there is a world of difference between FP features and the basic features people asked for in Go (like generics).