I'm sceptical that the syntax was a decision of Dylan's designers.  Look at their background and you've got to conclude that the syntax came from someone with a business bent? 

Well, a lot of the Dylan designers are former Lispers who prefer the elgance and simplicity of Lisp-like syntax.  But many of us are sick of being stuck in some specialized niche in the programming language world and are willing to embrace infix if that is what it takes to get mainstream acceptance Dylan.

I think it's pragmatic to make Dylan seem as familiar to the masses as possible, for example, by using a more familiar syntax. But this shouldn't be taken to the extreme of denying what's new or unique about it, particularly from the perspective of the C, C++, Pascal, etc. programmer. The documentation should, in fact, concentrate specifically on helping newcomers to the language get the right "mental models" (assuming no previous background in related languages).