This is fine, but surely you recognise that Rust is very far from an ideal language for many other people, because there are no universal rules here. There's nothing more obvious than the fact that every programming language aims for an audience with specific preferences and tastes who like it, while others, with different preferences and tastes don't like it. This is how programming languages work when there are no universals: they make choices that appeal to some but not others.

For example, I find Rust a particularly unappealing language because it's too complicated as a high-level language (it elevates too many low-level details and offers poor abstraction compared to high-level languages) while offering me few advantages, and it's too complicated for a low-level language, as it favours implicitness where I want explicitness. Clearly, there are many people who think like me, and many people who don't, and that is as it should be. It's perfectly fine for you and others to like Rust so much - it appeals to your particular tastes - just as it's perfectly fine for me and others to dislike it, because I tend to like simpler, smaller, and more focused languages. This is why I prefer Java over C#, Clojure over Scala, Haskell over Idris, and TLA+ over Lean, while being aware that many have similar preferences and many others have the opposite ones. Your preferences, like mine, are all valid and all far from universal. No language even tries to have a universal appeal, and none comes close.