I do think the Rails hate is overdone, considering Rails is still good at what it's good at - enabling you to build features fast enough to outpace competitors so that you get to the point where you actually have scalability problems. That's pretty valuable in and of itself. Hopefully projects like Rubinius will shore up the performance/scalability issues, though competing with the millions of man-hours spent making the JVM massively robust and performant will be a challenge.
The reference is not terribly subtle. Here's what the current reality is, direct from Rubinius article.
> Ruby became popular because Ruby on Rails accelerated the delivery of value by an order of magnitude. This influence is rapidly declining. Efficiencies that Rails introduced, things like convention over configuration and full-stack integration, also encouraged monolithic application architectures. Applications built this way are difficult to change and difficult to scale, which means that under changing conditions, their costs tend to quickly outweigh any value they deliver. Businesses are rapidly learning this lesson.
The subtle reference I was referring to (which made me mention Twitter) was that s/he wrote "scala" in place of "scale" in ["companies had to move off it to scale"] presumably by mistake, since it was later edited.
So that makes for half about the irony you are accounting for, the other half coming from you (and I really can't see no reason for it unless you had a hard time liking ruby/rails, which in turn would represent a very poor reason).
