The discussion is not about identifying problems. The issue is communicating the problem and explaining the impact. The Go team was wrong about monotonic time but the correct response is not to assign blame. Concrete examples and conversations are a better way to communicate a problem. This is what they are trying to communicate now.
And if you _do_ want to assign blame, it's fine to put it on us. I did as much in the talk:
"Just as we at Google did not at first understand the significance of handling leap second time resets correctly, we did not effectively convey to the broader Go community the significance of handling gradual code migration and repair during large-scale changes."
