I thought that this was going to be a technical article about specific problems that would occur if we changed the branch name, but nope, straight up defence of slavery.
This really makes it difficult to take anything in this article seriously.
> I wanted to start by focusing on the obvious one, Its harder for them to object to just one to start with, then once they admit the logic, we can expand the list
From Scott Aaronson's blog, when Quantum Supremacy was cancelled, because, as "master", "supremacy" is also wrongspeak.
Edit: link for the above quote https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=4450
I think there's also a mostly unspoken idea in there that it is really difficult to address socially sensitive issues in an email listserv format.
Finally, I do think there's something to the Munchausen's by proxy argument. It's a good metaphor, but an inflammatory one, and I wish it were handled with more sensitivity because of that.
* I also don't know that any progressives are pushing blasphemy laws, this is by definition a conservative action to preserve and protect institutions.
* I was hoping for a technical article too, but w/e.
I don't mind if GitHub wants to change their default, but don't assume that I want to change that for my own already-existing local repos.
