Well... I'd say that it'd help if the information was reliable, backed by evidence, up to date, referenced experts within the field and actually factually correct. Like http://www.seomoz.org/article/search-ranking-factors
A quick look at the site you mention gleans these words:
"SEOmoz surveys top SEO experts ...opinions of the algorithmic elements that comprise search engine rankings"
"Each participant was asked to rate more than 100 search ranking factors"
So it's not reliable, it's a survey.
It's not backed by evidence but by opinion.
And how can an SEO be called 'referenced'. I didn't realise SEO was a science.
The only true thing in your statement is up-to-date.
A better description would be that it's based on guess work by the men who are most known for snake oil and me-too mentality in the IT industry, SEO 'experts'.
Just playing devil's advocate but I don't really think that article is any more likely to be right than this guy's.
Anything that you think I've left out or would like to see updated?