This is a really interesting question. But IME, a skier with a flatter skiing style has a harder time getting his/her ski into and out of a turn without rotation at the top and skidding at the finish. And those, in turn, are more easily accomplished on a rockered ski. This isn't necessarily an indicator of ability; check out this: http://vimeo.com/48527669
Now IMO, this guy is a decent skier who chooses not to make a single carved turn all the way down. And who's taking some very airborne approaches to soft bumps. All good. But my point is that the ski's mildish rocker front and rear makes that style of skiing - which is becoming very popular - a lot easier. Yet ironically, it's also making life easier for low angle intermediates who can't buy a carve. They can carve easier at a moderate angle because the rocker's already bent for them, or they can skid easier at a low angle because so much of the ski is off the snow. Notice the number of "easy's" in that paragraph? A theme?
So is the Automatic, and all the other latest/greatest mild rockers, unstable or uncomfortable? Not to hear the reviewers talk about them. In reality, they have to be more unstable. So does the Bonafide. It's physics. But maybe not so unstable that it impacts people's perception of them under most conditions. Or maybe we just have altered expectations of what "stabile" means. Don't hear much of a groundswell for models like the Titan 9, Head 103, or Stockli SS. Unless you regard Valdez as your backyard and get lonely if someone's not filming you from a chopper.
And I think that most folks who bomb down blue runs will take that ease of turning over supreme stability any day of the week.