granted we have different uses for our gear but I can not agree with many of your points, I've rebutted within the quote re my experience with Fuji, Olympus and Pentax.
Viva la MILC!
Lack of lens Selection. - MFT system has a lot of great glass covering UWA to long zoom, Fuji X has the UWA to medium tele covered with long tele coming. The real limitation is MFT ultimate resolution is lower.
Lack of a Mature Flash system. - I'm not familiar with the Oly yet, I think it has some pretty decent capabilities, but Fuji X system flash is definitely weak. Pentax ML work with existing Pentax kit which is decent, but not extensive
Lack of Ergonomics for Long Handheld use. - definitely not. Every ML body I've got or used has a very comfy, if optional, grip available. E-M1 feels custom made for me even w-o the grip so this is, if anything, subjective.
Laggy EVF in Low Light. - last year, probably. newer systems, not really. Some gain-up very well in low light and maintain decent frame rates, like Fuji XT1 & XE2. I find they're quite easy to get used to using and compensating for any slight lag.
Slow AF - compared to what? Top line sports-oriented DSLRS?... then yes. good current ML systems AF speed is comparable to consumer/prosumer SLR, i.e., fast enough for most things, most users, and the accuracy is often very high.
Crap Battery Life. - will give you that one, most ML bodies w EVF do have some energy management options you can set that improve battery life by turning displays off if you've not got your mug up to them. But nowhere near the battery life of an efficient SLR - then again, ML's are still mostly handicapped by compact body forms and tiny batteries rather than the larger capacity batteries used in prosumer + SLRs. This could easily change with design alteration with present tech.
Crap Sync Speed (A7R) - ya, some could be faster, so could some SLRs too. -
No PC sync port. - it's right there on my Fuji XT1, and a simple and cheap hot-shoe adapter for everything else.
Viva la MILC!