It's weird that you link to a definition of "concern troll" and then manage to misapply it to a post that, even if it was trolling, is not concern-trolling.
I sort of agree with you - "concern troll" applies more to OP than this post, upon reflection - but let me explain my reasoning.
Lots of people have explained elsewhere in the thread why this is a completely trivial issue. I don't think it's a reasonable position to hold that a kilobyte of static data in the runtime is an actual problem that needs solving - if it were, we would see pull requests like any other bug, not a pearl-clutching HN thread.
Concern trolls attempt to weaken or fragment a community by pointing out "problems" that aren't actually big enough to actually warrant attention or energy, then accusing the community of weakness/malfeasance/hypocrisy for failing to act. This primarily serves to divide idealists (who want to solve every problem, no matter how small) from pragmatists (who want the community to focus its energy on things that matter).
Amplifying a small matter like this into a "deadly" one and claiming that it "reeks of immaturity" is such grandiose posturing that I personally cannot imagine it's in earnest. It seems more likely to me to be someone heavily invested in another toolchain who wants Rust to not be taken seriously, wants contributors to Rust to fret over every commit, and wants people considering Rust to worry about the consequences should they adopt it. That's all I intended to convey.
Actually I'm not invested in Rust (or Go) at all, but I am invested in critical infrastructure software. My intent was to support the op's assertion that compilers are serious business. I think they are. 1k among 100k might not make a difference, but to me it implicates an attitude and leaves me wondering what other cute games are hiding.
