Compromise is spelled a-p-p-e-a-s-e-m-e-n-t

So, after all the hubbub, what do we have now? An agreement among the "moderate" Republicans and the most centrist of the Democrats. What's in this agreement? Well, according to CNN.com, the deal allows for 3 of Smirky's judges to get the Republicans' only recently and conveniently cherished "up-or-down" vote, including the 2 most debated judges Owen and Brown. The other 2 choices (Myers and Saad) are still subject to filibustering. As far as principles go, "Democrats reserved the right to filibuster future judicial nominations in 'extraordinary circumstances.' Republicans kept the power to revisit the nuclear option if they believe Democrats are filibustering in circumstances that do not reach that standard."
Um, let me get this "compromise" worked out. The Democrats get to keep using the filibuster, but if they do, the Republicans can trot out the nuclear option again? How is this any different from where we were yesterday morning? In addition, the Democrats let 3 of the 5 judges bottled up by this threatened filibuster get to the floor for a confirmation vote in return for what? Do the Democrats really believe that these "moderate" Republicans are going to support their efforts to defeat the noxious Owen and Brown, let alone any other Smirky appointees? Does the phrase "2703-1" ring any bells? These are the same "moderates" that voted in lockstep with all of the far-right loonies in every single case since Smirky took office. Trusting them now to be independent thinkers seems like an awfully thin reed to hold onto as the major achievement for the Democrats in this deal.
Trusting the current crop of Senatorial Republicans to play fair is simply a waste of hope; is there any doubt that if the Democrats threaten to filibuster even once, these Republicans will scream loud, long, and consistently that the Democrats are breaking the deal? What power does this really leave the Democrats that they didn't have before the "compromise", and under much more advantageous political conditions? All the polls seemingly favored the Democrats' handling of this situation; the public was actually getting the right idea about what the Republicans were trying to do. That they are trying to subvert the Senate rules in order to achieve total dominance over every process and aspect of our government for the foreseeable future. That they already control all 3 branches of the government, and by substantial margins, wasn't enough for them. That they are seeking to undo many (all?) governmental programs by any means necessary, this time through the overturning of the judicial nomination and approval rules. The public was getting it.
But now, it looks like all the public will see is that they can relax, "moderates" are once again "in control", and nothing bad will happen. If these judges get confirmed, and we have absolutely no evidence based on past voting practices that they won't be, the public will simply assume that they must be good judges. Just wait until there is some sort of class-action suit involving horrible disfigurements or deaths in front of Appellate Court Justice Owen and she tosses it simply because she believes that businesses shouldn't be punished for doing business. By then it'll be too late, because she'll be on that bench (or higher) for life. What will we have gained through this "compromise" then?