Since my alternative multi-question approach does not seem to be gaining support/traction, I must accept the message communicated by that low participation.
Given the high-level nature of the decision to go/no-go with adoption of a replacement tool, i.e. abandon Vim and adopt Neovim, isn't there some benefit to the community to keep all the related material under a single umbrella question (i.e. SPOC approach) so that community members wouldn't need to go searching and cherry-picking from different responses that are unrelated to each other?
To repeat a comment that I posted elsewhere, I must say that to force the discussion of such an overriding issue (aka Risks of Migration) into many narrow, disconnected and disassociated questions is not conducive to having a wholistic view of the issue at hand.
Forcing discussion of various contributing factors, out of context of other factors, prevents a proper fleshing out of the full scope of issues, or making evident the inter-dependencies, one may encounter ... and need to fully weigh before making that final decision.
As a side comment regarding the approach taken by the site in regards to my question,
- I recognize the need to minimize opinion-based responses, and keeping responses fact-based;
- with my original question, I tried to achieve that but was told otherwise.
It is my perspective that for any community, there must be, on occasion, instances where the "boundaries" of the community must be relaxed/adapted to encompass a situation which, while it counters the original defined concepts for the community, does nonetheless serve to meet the community's needs by providing benefits that negate the "harm" perceived by allowing the community to involve itself with, or participate in, its continuance/promotion/growth.
It is my earnest belief that my original question falls into that category of special topic deserving of flexibility in treatment and review of the responses provided ... in order to serve the community as a whole.