Skip-fudge bogus(?) tests

The tests were added[^1] in Dec 2017 and aren't part of 6.c language.
These currently exercise RT#132711 / RT#131099 when RT#132713 is fixed
and based on comments on RT#131099 these should likely complain about
meaningless associativity rather than work.

P.S.: fudger refused to fudge these right, so I fudged manually

[1] 8cbbf89

S06-operator-overloading/prefix.t

@@ -53,26 +53,26 @@ plan 10;
 # RT #123216
 subtest 'coverage for crashes in certain operator setups' => {
     plan 2;
-
-    is-deeply do {
-        sub postfix:<_post_l_>($a) is assoc<left> is equiv(&prefix:<+>) {
-            "<$a>"
-        }
-        sub prefix:<_pre_l_>  ($a) is assoc<left> is equiv(&prefix:<+>) {
-            "($a)"
-        }
-        (_pre_l_ 'a')_post_l_
-    }, '<(a)>', '(1)';
-
-    is-deeply do {
-        sub infix:«MYPLUS»(*@a) is assoc('list') {
-            [+] @a;
-        }
-
-        sub prefix:«MYMINUS»($a) is looser(&infix:<MYPLUS>) {
-            -$a;
-        }
-
-        (MYMINUS 1 MYPLUS 2 MYPLUS 3)
-    }, -6, '(2)';
+    skip 'RT#132711', 2;
+    # is-deeply do {
+    #     sub postfix:<_post_l_>($a) is assoc<left> is equiv(&prefix:<+>) {
+    #         "<$a>"
+    #     }
+    #     sub prefix:<_pre_l_>  ($a) is assoc<left> is equiv(&prefix:<+>) {
+    #         "($a)"
+    #     }
+    #     (_pre_l_ 'a')_post_l_
+    # }, '<(a)>', '(1)';
+    #
+    # is-deeply do {
+    #     sub infix:«MYPLUS»(*@a) is assoc('list') {
+    #         [+] @a;
+    #     }
+    #
+    #     sub prefix:«MYMINUS»($a) is looser(&infix:<MYPLUS>) {
+    #         -$a;
+    #     }
+    #
+    #     (MYMINUS 1 MYPLUS 2 MYPLUS 3)
+    # }, -6, '(2)';
 }