main selling points are isolation and having the latest version directly from developers without having to wait for your distro to package/update it.
both are debatable since they are not as good as promoted (isolation doesn’t always work correctly and it’s a mess to configure it once you use anything different than the more mainstream distros) or goes against the historical preference (using bundled everything instead of cooperating with your distro packages and trusting every individual over trusting your distro as a whole) but having the latest version on any distro without having to wait is a popular need so they gained traction quite fast. this might make little sense for rolling release distros (arch, nix) but it’s helpful if you have a stable base (years old debian) but need the latest feature on an specific application or have to use very specific libraries that are not packaged on the main distro and would require complex upgrades
the most infuriating part is how they decide anubis is bad (valid concerns, i do share some of them) but haven’t talked about any possible alternative, even a temporary one, they can use to avoid overworking their two sysadmins. anubis is specially useful for sites like that, where they had very little admin power. trying to use gnu sites lately is a pain because they are often not-operational, which is way more disrupting than having to wait a bit for whatever challenge they could have
the whole post reads like an useless rant without any proper aim. if they are so interested on the free internet, they could probably try and come up with some alternative but the way they talk makes me think they are just ignorant of the modern hostile internet and just want to magically return to the past where this didn’t happened without having to do any effort about it