I largely agree with the sentiments of the article, but side-effect I like is that it tests assumptions in git systems about "default" branches, and ensures tha

I largely agree with the sentiments of the article, but side-effect I like is that it tests assumptions in git systems about "default" branches, and ensures that software isn't too committed to a certain branch name - so that people can call branches whatever they like. Even on Github people can still use master if they want, it just isn't the default.