When people say it's an obstacle for adoption, exactly in what way? Do you mean that they actually tried to compile something, and it failed because of identifiers being considered the same in Nim? Or just that they looked at the web page, saw that and that is the thing they decided to use as the reason they we're giving? Because in the first case, it seems it would be better to differentiate the identifiers with say one more deacriptive, and in the second case they may just not want to learn a new language anyway but didn't want to say that.
However if it is the first case and they couls not change the codebase because it was too many other identifiers or something, I'd that occurs frequently it could be a case for making it optional. But we would need to confirm that they actually tried and had a practical issue that wasn't better resolved with just making identifiers more specific.
