Would any of the "pipe" advocates mind taking a stab at the *current* source methods, and rewrite the method showing how pipe syntax would have simplified or clarified the method?
I ask this because I suspect that if you're following good practices (such as those adovocated in Beck's "Smalltalk Best Practice Patterns"), you won't actually *need* a pipe syntax, because your code would never have gotten that complicated.
So, instead of writing Smalltalk with a bias for your previous programming language where pipe makes more sense, how about taking some *native* Smalltalk to show how pipe would have helped?