I'm the author of both the original article and this HN posting - and yes, I am biased, since I'm the main developer of RingoJS (the other platform in that benchmark). I've made that quite clear and provided additional background in the original benchmark to which this is just a short update: http://hns.github.com/2010/09/21/benchmark.html
I think my benchmark and the conclusions I draw from it (after a lot of thinking) are fair. My intention is just to make people see there's no magic bullet with performance or scalability, and that there are alternatives for server-side JavaScript.
I think your conclusions in the article are fair. I think the title on HN is misleading because it's a quantitive issue.
V8 GC is a well known concern in the Node community, but it's still performing well enough that Node is considerably faster than traditional servers (like Apache). The fact that Ringo is also faster doesn't make V8 "not ready" it just means it could be improved.
If I wanted to be contentious I could suggest that "Hacker News comments confirms that RingoJS may not be ready for developers" because the author likes taking pot shots at other frameworks. But that would be petty, wouldn't it?
You are right about the title. That "not ready for the server" is a foolish phrase. I'd change it to "not tuned for the server" if I could, but it looks like it's impossible to change that now.
I think my benchmark and the conclusions I draw from it (after a lot of thinking) are fair. My intention is just to make people see there's no magic bullet with performance or scalability, and that there are alternatives for server-side JavaScript.