AFAIU, "list" has a specific technical meaning when used by someone complaining about Clojure not having them. It has to do with the implementation details, not just the semantics of how they're used.
Clojure has "sequences" or "seqs", which are semantically the closest to what lispers mean by a "list"—but also "vectors," denoted by square brackets, "maps," denoted by curly brackets, and "sets", denoted by curly brackets prefixed with a hash sign. Having these as core data structures violates the Lisp principle of "everything is just a list," and they introduce something other than round parens into the syntax, which looks really weird to those practiced with traditional/conventional Lisps.
For those well-practiced in "true" Lisps, Clojure reads like a very strange hybrid (one might say "corruption") of Lisp and JSON.
Clojure has "sequences" or "seqs", which are semantically the closest to what lispers mean by a "list"—but also "vectors," denoted by square brackets, "maps," denoted by curly brackets, and "sets", denoted by curly brackets prefixed with a hash sign. Having these as core data structures violates the Lisp principle of "everything is just a list," and they introduce something other than round parens into the syntax, which looks really weird to those practiced with traditional/conventional Lisps.
For those well-practiced in "true" Lisps, Clojure reads like a very strange hybrid (one might say "corruption") of Lisp and JSON.