Okay, I admit that a "good" performance is relative to the intended use and limited by the many features it has to support, so I'll drop that point.
However, as far as stability goes, I have read multiple reports on the internet about having lost data with Btrfs within the past year. Reports that I saw none of for some other filesystems. I read your post you mentioned, even you had data loss with Btrfs once! Just because you had no data corruption in the past few/who-knows-how-many months does not mean that Btrfs is currently in a state where it provides similar data protection to more established systems. A filesystem must be able to preserve data over crashes, across power-outages and over many years, and nobody has been able to demonstrate that with Btrfs, unfortunately quite the opposite. The situation might be better with newer kernel as you said, but a filesystem is a component that has to earn the users' trust, and Btrfs, even if it is promising, has not yet done so. Especially if the've only ironed out the more common bugs in recent kernels as you said, I assure you there are still more than plenty lurking around waiting to be triggered in less common cases. But that is fine: A filesystem, especially one like btrfs, is highly complex and like every similar software it needs time to mature. But please nobody tell me that Btrfs is stable and can be used on production systems yet, unless you have years of experience and half a million users to prove it.
You're right, Btrfs has HAD issues. HOWEVER all known corruption bugs, all failed recovery bugs and the likes have been sorted out. Btrfs biggest "issue" right now is the lack of an fsck.btrfs which is only an issue for automatically running fsck on boot, for manually running fsck there is btrfsck. Unfortunately there wont be an fsck.btrfs until the fsck developers do the API changes that the btrfs devs have requested so that all of btrfs fsck-related features can be used.
And yes, I have had ONE failure of btrfs and that was due to a power outage mid-update. It is very possible (though unfortunately impossible to prove or disprove) that if there was an fsck.btrfs in the initrd that it would have detected a dirty-shutdown and automatically run fsck and recovered the filesystem no problem. I could have also tried running btfsck from the live environment, but as I said...it was a brand new install, I didnt really care enough to bother trying to fix it, i just did a reinstall.
I agree that btrfs needs time to mature and grow before being fully marked as "Work environment stable." That being said, btrfs (on recent kernels) I do believe is "Home environment stable." So whether or not btrfs is "stable" really comes down to the environment at hand and your general guidelines for what is "stable."