Why is `scope` planned for deprecation?

[Araq via Digitalmars-d]

> I think it make sense to have something for ownership. The 
> error of rust wasn't going that road, but going in that road 
> 100%, which come at a cost at interface level which is too 
> important. A simpler ownership system, that fallback on the GC 
> or unsafe feature when it fall short.
>
> I'm confident at this point that we can get most of the benefit 
> of an ownership system with something way simpler than rust's 
> system if you accept to not cover 100% of the scenarios.

Do you happen to have any concrete reasons for that? An example
maybe? Maybe start with explaining how in detail Rust's system is
too complex? I'm sure the Rust people will be interested in how
you can simplify a (most likely sound) type system that took
years to come up with and refine.