I mean, in this case, no one's forcing. More like advocating.
And git is a very flexible tool with a lot of generic functions. Pull requests themselves are a prescriptive style of using those generic functions. A "Branchless" workflow is not the author failing to understand git. It's using those functions differently.
And I fail to see how it's worse that workflow constraints may be placed on a very generic tool like git to work better with more specialized tooling in other places.
"I can put any text in a commit message, so why do I have to start it with this specific text?"
"Because that's how our organization tracks work, and the ability to track historic work in this way is more valuable to us than you being able to write whatever you want at the start of a commit message"
And git is a very flexible tool with a lot of generic functions. Pull requests themselves are a prescriptive style of using those generic functions. A "Branchless" workflow is not the author failing to understand git. It's using those functions differently.
And I fail to see how it's worse that workflow constraints may be placed on a very generic tool like git to work better with more specialized tooling in other places.
"I can put any text in a commit message, so why do I have to start it with this specific text?"
"Because that's how our organization tracks work, and the ability to track historic work in this way is more valuable to us than you being able to write whatever you want at the start of a commit message"