That's a great write up and something that would be invaluable to the devs, it's also great for Negative Nancies to point at and go "LOOK IT'S BROKEN" but I feel it's important to understand software and game development. Things like this where you list a decent amount of bugs looks bad, but in reality it's not.

If you've ever worked QA you'd know that you mark bugs to a certain severity and/or how much priority you believe that issue should get. (This differs from company to company)

I guarantee you 99% of the things you listed and many more that aren't are known to the dev team and are being worked on depending on how severe they feel it is. It's the nature of development that a QA team, especially a small one like Tripwire/Antimatter have are going to have certain things slip through their fingers or it wasn't considered worth their time, it's just unavoidable especially with modern game development.

The reality is it's completely acceptable for games to ship with some bugs and minor gameplay issues as long as they are not considered highly detracting from the gameplay experience, or the bug happens infrequently enough as to not be a high priority. This doesn't equal a bad, broken or unfinished game and if you have that belief I have to wonder how you play any game that isn't an extremely simple indie game where it's really easy to identify and fix bugs because it has an engine simple enough that it just doesn't happen.

The game is finished, software that ships with some bugs is still finished and a 23 page document doesn't prove the game is still in a beta state or something. There is a word for it and it's called nitpicking, if you put something like this together in an effort to actually help development that's great. But if you're just using it to try and prove some kind of point where the game is 'broken and unfinished' I really, really have to disagree.