Except those who are new to the field, yet still have worthwhile contributions. They are shut out.
Removing this bullshit signaling and standards is what we've been trying to do in academics for decades, to allow even children from lower class families to actively contribute without any disadvantage to their peers.
Yet, now you're saying that this signaling is a "win-win situation"?
Those new to the field would not appreciate why something is immutable and monadic, they are shut out. (Doesn't mean they can't churn out a simple form in VB).
It's not reasonable to hold everyone hostage to the least common denominator. That only foster mediocrity. Thankfully computer science has not suffered much from this, and I don't think social sciences should be held back either.
If you publish an algorithm in a paper, it's acceptable to do it in any language, pseudocode, as flowchart, structogram, etc.
I've seen papers describing algorithms in Scheme, Haskell, but also in python before.
Similarly there's no reason to expect a random person off the street to understand the language of a modern philosophical book.
Each field of study (social sciences and computer sciences) has its own domain specific language and concepts that requires some work to get your head around.
Maybe you should write a paper :)