I'm on the fence about this. I don't see anything wrong with the way things have been but I suppose we would never move forward if we were opposed to change. Math was never my subject so I'm afraid I cannot comment more intellegently.
So the idea is not about the value of pi, at all. Rather, it's simply a matter of dethroning pi as a sort of holy grail number for mathematics. Frankly, it won't make any difference whatsoever, and I think it's a little petty of Bob Palais to beg for publicity and notoriety in this way. I think the layman's equivalent would be if an English professor decided to write an article about how Shakespeare shouldn't really be considered the classic example of mastery of the English language, but that it should actually be William Wordsworth instead. It doesn't make any difference in how work gets done in that field; it's just a way to rock the boat and get some attention.
"Dethroning pi as a sort of holy grail number for mathematics"
I think that says it exactly. In fact, I was rather surprised to read that "tau" is actually merely 2xPi. Palais was basically arguing that formulae in advanced math don't really use Pi, but do use 2Pi.
But in order to find Tau (2Pi), it's necessary to find Pi first.