> Atom would cause silent data loss too, if you did what that feed is (effectively) doing
Blatantly false. Fixing this exact problem was *the* single most important driving factor behind Atom's content model. Atom can faithfully describe plain text data that includes angle brackets and ampersands.
RSS is not simple because you're better at this than we are. RSS is simple because it's broken. Even Dave has admitted this now, and proposed a solution to RSS's silent data loss problem that looks remarkably similar to Atom's content model (except not as elegant).
If you fix all the things that are wrong with RSS, and then add all the features and ideas that the Atom community has been brainstorming with vendors and publishers, then in a few more years, you might end up with a format that's half as good as Atom. I say "half as good" because it won't really have any coherence; it'll just be an even larger pile of desperate and ignorant hacks than it is already. It won't have a consistent content model like Atom has today. It won't have a consistent linking model like Atom has today. And of course it won't be "simple" like RSS is widely mis-regarded today... but it might actually not cause silent data loss, so that would definitely be a step in the right direction.
RSS isn't simple because you're better at this; RSS is simple because it's broken.