I wouldn't begrudge anyone who made similar judgments about the Common Lisp community based on their interactions with some of its more colorful personalities. I further wouldn't disagree that there are major flaws in CL the language. Why do Haskellers have so much difficulty doing likewise? Other than minor concessions, such as records, Haskell is apparently perfect (and spaceleaks are only ever a problem if you're a n00b)... The whole thing reeks of a cult.
Your experiences are completely different to mine, and I've been a member of the community for about 8 years now. Haskellers are in general very aware of the flaws in the language, and this isn't limited to records - space leaks are the primary reason for the proliferation of streaming IO libraries. And for records, we've been lead to lenses, which are an extremely powerful abstraction which surpasses, IMO, whats available in most other languages in terms of being able to interact with nested data structures (giving them such a limited definition is doing them a disservice, because they're far more powerful than that). You keep mentioning the use of the "if it compiles, it works" phrase - this is clearly a meme, and often used as a joke, but is also used as a goal for writing reliable software: if we can encode enough of our problem domain into the type system, then we can be much more certain that if we write programs which compile, they likely do what we want them to. If it not a synonym for "If it compiles, it has no bugs and is perfect", which is how you seem to be interpreting it.
