I wouldn't call it "tragedy of the commons" because the very idea was coined as a strawman. As far as I'm concerned, the entire concept is a fallacy, and people should stop perpetuating it.
As I understand it, WASM GC provides a number of low level primitives that are managed by the WASM host runtime, which would theoretically allow languages like Go or Python to slim down how much of their own language runtime needs to be packaged into the WASM module.
But how those languages still need to carry around some runtime of their own, and I don't think it's obvious how much a given language will benefit.
I'm not who you were asking, but my only experiences with vlang was years ago when its marketing was making false claims about what its capabilities were, while pretending to be an already production-ready language. This in turn harbored tons of distrust about any of its promises of future capabilities too.
At this point, I don't think it matters if the V programming language has actually fixed all of those issues and its marketing is completely truthful now. The language's perception is tainted, and it'll take a herculean effort to fix that.
I have not seen much of any anti-Rust sentiment in the community. There's a lot of people in the community who do Rust, like rust, and work on rust projects. If the Zig community has an anti-anything sentiment, it's against C++.
Or at least the oldest one made before glibc's latest backwards incompatible ABI break.