It's great to discuss ways to improve things, but that is different than suggesting that the whole thing is rotten to the core and needs a re-work from the ground up. The productive way to do this is to identify specific deficiencies and propose targeted incremental improvements to address them. This is what all the people involved in various standards and implementations on the web have been doing for years. This is working, progress is just slow and difficult, as it is with most things that are worth doing.
Okay, so what's wrong with discussing the limitations of the human body and the ways to improve it then?
Yes, the web evolved instead of being designed (however much that distinction makes sense), but arrived at a shi^H^H^H suboptimal result. And it arrived there through deliberate design decisions of people - who unfortunately were designing a different system in the first place.
It's like English. I love English, but it's a bloody mess that we're all stuck with now - except that changing a computer system is comparatively easy to changing the direction of a language.