Thanks for not assuming I'm a racist. Looking back, I couched my response in terms of "if you are offended by the word, then..." and I don't think I directly i

Thanks for not assuming I'm a racist. Looking back, I couched my response in terms of "if you are offended by the word, then..." and I don't think I directly indicated that I thought you were offended. To be honest, I don't think the people who even kicked this off at GitHub are offended. They're just trying to do something. There already is skin off your nose with this change though. First, because you're already here having to waste your attention on defending it. Second, because if Git and other tools surrounding GitHub don't change then there will be constant friction. (e.g. What now happens if you init a repo on your PC and push to GitHub with the default `master` branch? That's my exact workflow.) Third, if you have to do the work yourself to change it on your own projects. Fourth, because if you don't cover your ass 100% you'll potentially be targeted by this witch hunt. Maybe you don't mind one or two of those situations, but I doubt you would all of them. > ...but without a doubt it is one of its definitions (and one of the important ones in the history of the US). I don't know what that means. Ideas are important. Words are constantly changing by meaning and usage and they're really only as important as a person allows them to be. In my opinion, assigning power or importance to inanimate things is folly. Power lies in controlling how you react to things. Philosophically it has been said that the only thing you can truly change in this world is how you react to things. At the end of the day, this is a GitHub company decision. I can't do anything about it other than exploring my thoughts and talking about it. If GitHub starts harassing me over not changing my branch names though, I'll leave the platform in a heartbeat.