I don't really agree here, even if they're not used much by the community OCaml can be written as a regular procedural or OO language. There are a few thing that can look weird for people new to this (immutable by default, the type system) but they're precisely what people looking for a GC'd Rust want I think. Rust also takes a lot from functional languages, and idiomatic Rust code usually looks like functional code. I think the biggest shock coming from Rust to OCaml would be the compiler errors and the quantity of online resources. There's a world of difference between the two, and they matter a lot when learning. I think the same is true for Scala. I don't know if F# is the same but since it takes from OCaml it may still have the procedural capabilities, and it seems it still has the OO features of OCaml.
I do agree that D and Nim may be easier to approach from C# or Java, or even Python for Nim or C and C++ for D. These already represent a huge chunk of programmers, but not really what the typical person looking for a "garbage collected Rust" is, in my opinion. Especially since Java and C# programmers already have Scala and F#. While they're both different from what they're used to, they leverage the same plateform and can use the same libraries which is a huge plus.
I agree with your conclusion too, and I think OCaml suffers from this too. Scala and F# have at least the libraries part covered.