I like CRUX. In fact, I was the one who recommended you try it.
It is a bit too 'crude' for me to use as my everyday system. As was mentioned, it requires too much patience and user intervention when dealing with packages. Messy removal of installed ports and waiting for compilation of everything is just not my idea of the ideal system.
The number of ports is also an issue for me; even if they doubled the ports collection in size, it would still be lacking quite a bit.
As I have mentioned many times, I believe that package management should be an absolute 'no-brainer'- the main reason I avoid CRUX and Slack.
I certainly like the concept- a streamlined set of core packages, and serious community contributions, (prt-get was a community innovation).
But, Arch simply does it so much better for me; much larger repositories, much larger community, pacman and binaries in addition to a ports-like system and the AUR.
If I was 20 years younger and still enamored by the thrill of being an 'outsider', or 'one of the few' who use an unpopular yet incredibly cool thing, I might like it even more.
For me, CRUX does a lot of things the right way.
Arch just does them all better, and adds more extensibility along with it, effortlessly.