I hope you professional taxonomists will not take offense at the opinion of a lay person, but several things occur to me and I seek guidance from those who know more than I.
The preface of the current iteration of the PhyloCode (v2b) specifically states that part of the purpose of establishing a new system is a desire to eliminate the inherent structural creationism in the Linnean system, although this has been, for the most part, simply ignored since Darwin. Even so, stating it baldly is certain to distract the majority of creationist scientists (forgive the apparent oxymoron).
In addition, the PhyloCode is, in theory, able to coexist with the Linnean system. That is spin. It cannot do so, and the great majority of scientists who have developed a memory pattern based upon the old system simply cannot suddenly translate the knowledge accrued over an entire career into a system which is not fully mature.
I agree that a better system is probably long overdue, but in order for it to be accepted, the authors will have to go to the trouble of actually re-classifying everything to the parameters of their system and presenting it to the scientific community as a fait accompli instead of proposing a new classification and asking scientists to contribute to a database. That is a disaster waiting to happen.
And finally, this is a cladistic model even though it is called something else. In it, the newest member of any clade is identified and charted but, until everything which ever lived on the planet is identified by DNA or whatever comes next, it is merely a guessing game and can therefore not be any more accurate than the Linnean system (which I dislike immensely because I am not able to follow it logically).
I believe it is a good idea whose time has not come unless they do the work themselves. Conversely, I believe religion, and specifically organized religion is an idea whose time has past.
I don't proofread.....a sad failing from my college days when I didn't have to. Please forgive the typos.
™ Version 4.2