It's just a way to visualize information. I find this interesting to look at and also well organized (personally love the color coding and the asymmetry).
In either case, no reason to be negative. If you don't like it, don't use it. If you are commenting to critique, no reason to be a jerk.
The periodic table isn't just a nice layout of information, the position of each element in the table provides further information about it. For example, we know gold (Au) is pretty a pretty good conductor of electricity. By looking at the other elements in its group (the column), we can guess that copper (Cu) and silver (Ag) are also good electrical conductors (in fact, some of the best).
Beyond that simple case, there are loads of other bits of information encoded in the position. The image on the Wikipedia article gives a good overview of some of the trends.
I'm well aware that the periodic table has a lot of various information encoded into it as I'm pretty sure anyone who's gone through high school is as well. I am not sure why you think the tags table is trying to fool anyone... it was chosen symbolically and it looks visually better than any other similar attempt I've seen before.
Not everything needs to be pigeonholed into the "must make perfect sense" category.
Color code is nice here. I appreciate the gathered information.
But I am criticising visualizing using things such as periodic tables (were columns, rows and gaps have a particular meaning) for visualization for which they don't fit. Since it is not the first time I see such.
May point is not to use this particular visualization or not, but to make people thinking for a few seconds before starting visualizing: "Does the structure of this visualization fit the purpose? Or is it more like hammering nails with an iPhone?" (you can != you should).
In either case, no reason to be negative. If you don't like it, don't use it. If you are commenting to critique, no reason to be a jerk.