It was also the way the OP started this "discussion" in a bit flamebate-ish manner.

The thing that ticks me off with some of the fanboyish remarks about Ethereum is that they paint a misleading picture for non-technical people. It also doesn't help that quite a few bitcoin-media-sites seem to be really happy to be a fanboy instead of taking a more objective approach, or even mentioning other possible solutions to the same problem(s).

I'm also uncomfortable with the way the E-team is selling their idea, centering around the buzzword "Turing-completeness" suggesting that they can do absolutely everything, while all other coins are somehow "incomplete" or incapable of doing what's theoretically possible in Ethereum. That does not make them a scam, but I do feel they are deceiving people when they do not make the limitations and risks very clear.

To give one ridiculous example I've heard a E-spokesperson say, is how they could "easily" replicate Wall Street with a few basic math-functions in an Ethereum script. The way it was said gives people the idea that you could run Wall Street and everything else on top of Ethereum, which is of course completely unrealistic if you consider bandwidth, speed, reliability, etcetera, especially if you want to use the E-network for other things as well. Another one I've heard is that you could run all other alt-coins on top of Ethereum, which also makes no sense at all.

YarkoLs' naming it another experiment for smart-contracts on top of a blockchain, is one of the most accurate ones I've heard and also makes the target niche-market very clear. Mastercoin and Ethereum could be considered competitors in the same market. Still I don't think this will make the limitations of Ethereum clear to everyone, nor that Ethereum cannot and will not do everything people are ascribing to it. Most of the pie-in-the-sky ideas I've heard as examples of things-you-could-do on Ethereum seem to be more efficiently written in a couple of Turing-complete languages on their own blockchain either via merged mining (not only in line with Satoshis ideas, but seems to be the consensus among the current bitcoin-devs as well), written from scratch, or with the help of something like the DAC-toolkits in development at Invictus/Bitshares.

EDIT
Somewhat related to this subject, I just took a look at bitshares.org and even though it appears to be wip, it does look like a nice effort to combine and discuss ideas to create practical decentralized solutions. From a quick scan of their website-in-construction and most forum posts by the devs, they appear to be fairly neutral and willing to look at all solutions, even ones not developed by them. One big plus in my book is how the projects-website lists "competitors" (Namecoin, Ripple, NXT, Ethereum and probably others) in the respective categories at the bottom, without belittling them or subjective connotations (that I could see at first glance anyway). Some of the projects being discussed on their forums also looked very interesting, especially their discussion about an alternative proof of stake that seems to be a mix of ripple, nxt and decentralized mining-pools.