Writing about tea is definitely fun, as well as reading such notes (for me so, at least). However, there is some criticism of too deep/thorough analysis of tastes due to subjectivity.
I myself sometimes write about small tastes occuring in teas (though, I hope, not too much to bore you). Why? I think that even very detailed taste description may be useful, but one needs to have a reference. If you have a teachum who sent you samples and you read his notes, when you read what he writes about other teas, you might have a pretty good idea what the tea is like. Without that, however, it may leave you completely clueless. From my own experience, I know that there are many ways of describing a taste - with the likenings may be quite far from one another in reality.
Why do I write about tastes? Well, I have an almost-perfect reference, which is myself. I think that it is good to write notes about tea in detail, as when I read my notes two years after I wrote them, I still might get a good idea what the tea was like. However, the use of such notes to others is largely questionable, I'm afraid.
When I read about people's disagreement with too detailed tasting notes, I thought "wait, it works in wine". Actually, that is why I think it might work in puerh too, sort of. There are several obstacles to this though. The wine tasting conventions were not summonned by a french wizard, but they sort of evolved into their current state, via sharing and tasting together. This process may be a bit more difficult in puerh for the following reasons:
a) Water: Two people may come to different conclusions about a single tea because of different water used. The same tea with different waters used may be more different than when two teas (different, but, e.g., from the same mountain range) are prepared with the same water. Therefore, various tasters may come to different conclusions about a tea.
b) Storage: Again, difference in storage can make a huge difference. If you compare a tea stored for 10 years in HK and in Kunming, I doubt you'd have guessed it was the same tea. Besides, it also depends on how far in the aging process the tea is. When a wine is drank, it still usually resembles itself when young. In puerh, that may not be true at all.
c) Preparation: While wine performance does rely heavily on the glass used, there are not really any steeping times to play with (all right, there is temperature, decantation, etc...).
d) More fakes: self-explanatory
e) Subjectivity outside-taste components: Different people feel qi/mouthfeel/bodyfeel differently. There may be a sort of population coding, but it will still hamper the evolutionary process.
f) Personal bias. That is partly relevant in wine too, but it seems stronger to me in puerh. People tend to deduct properties of teas they drink from their actual properties. I.e., one person nearby drinks mostly Xiaguan stuff, which means that you have to translate his "tastes of overripe fruit with hints of flowers" into "80% smoke, 15% overripe fruit, 5% flowers" - but because he drinks mostly Xiaguan, he ignores the smoke entirely.
In my opinion, there are basically three levels (interleaved) of detail:
1) Top-level: E.g., sweet/sour, thick/thin, smoky/not-smoky, bitter/not, astringent/not - most people can agree about that and these features do approach some sort of objectivity.
2) Mid-level: E.g. overripe fruit, dried fruit, apples, longan, camphor, dry wood,... I think that these can work locally - be it in a tasting group or a set of bloggers exchanging samples. I think that this level of detail is probably still worth pursuing/standardizing and it can be useful to wider public. But outside its locality, it may fall apart. That may not be a problem though. I think that if you gave Hermitage to a Bordeaux drinker and Burgundy drinker, you might end up with quite different answers too.
3) Low-level: Burning walnut leaves, clay under freshly sprinkled dwarwen bamboo, sunday tobacco of uncle Jim, etc. While these will be hardly useful to anyone but the writer, it may be still worthwhile for him and therefore I would not dismiss even this sort of notes.
By the way, I thought this resource quite good. It may be about wine and in french, but it seems like a good reading to me, even though my french is abysmal.