I think people with experience in the field are just annoyed with her poorly-conceived assertions at the end, e.g. "This has got to be some of the worst jargon and notation for anything, ever." rather than pedantry.
Only a lot of experience could just be cargo cult and busy work, as is in most fields.
I.e the music world's analogue to: "but of course you need to make XML configuration files for everything and FactoryFactorySingletons etc, that's how we do things in J2EE".
There's been other proposed notations, but they all have their own shortcomings. Any alternative would have to be much better than the standard one, otherwise nobody would bother to retrain to use it.
The problem with this blog post is that it's clear that there's a lot they don't understand but they still criticize without finding out the why (which many commenters here have provided those answers).
I think the blog post could be much better written without the uniformed commentary as there's some things that are good about it. It's just that the other parts puts some people off from recommending it.
I'm not an a musician by most measures, and definitely not an experienced one. I lack exactly training and experience, so my understanding of music notation comes from the same kind of observations as the post author - only over a longer time and in the context of playing many instruments badly. So I don't think I drank any cool aid.
So, my comment is a response to the specific points they made. Yes, there may be cargo culture around it, and certainly the system isn't perfect. But their examples are non-examples of that.
I.e the music world's analogue to: "but of course you need to make XML configuration files for everything and FactoryFactorySingletons etc, that's how we do things in J2EE".