Perhaps its because the desired trait has no moral worth in itself. It's application of peer pressure at its most brazen. It sounds to me like, "you're not conforming to the group's norms", or "you're exhibiting lower than acceptable levels of groupthink".
Anyway, I agree with naming (the most important aspect of programming style, IMHO) and "why over how" comments. The consistent style, I'm a lot less enamoured with. Aligned '=' assignments drive me up the wall - particularly when there are short variables like 'i' mixed with nice long descriptive names, where it can be hard to see what corresponds to what with the gap in the middle. But, of such stuff wars are made.
The other argument against consistent style is archeological: style idiosyncrasies, providing they aren't too far off the beaten track, can make it clear at a glance who on the team modified a particular piece of code.