> Honestly don't know what you're getting at here. You're going to have to spell this one out to me.

You said "I can almost guarantee that it's not someone with a guilty conscience believing that naming their branch differently absolves them of something they or their ancestors did." but the accusation of doing it out of "white guilt" isn't really saying they were trying to absolve themselves of something their ancestors did.

> I don't disagree. See my comment about people engaging in performative outrage, it does exist. But in this case you're annoyed at the very sight of the word "main". Like ... c'mon

Annoyance is pretty mild. If seeing it reminds me of it, what do you expect to happen? I don't think that's unreasonable.

> Are you misunderstanding that "However if you're really getting upset ..." means "However you're truly getting upset ..." and not "You're getting really upset ..."?

I understand that. By even bringing it up you're implying it's necessary to worry about people "truly getting upset" which is not saying great things about your opinion of your conversation partners. I mean look above where you said "c'mon", you're implying that it's unreasonable for me to be "annoyed".

> Additionally if you read my comment, I provide two interpretations:

And I was talking about interpretation 2 specifically.

I interpret "I have to WTF" as something akin to a double take, not "truly getting upset".

> This is a very important thing to consider when answering the question "Why do new browsers use Chromium instead of Firefox as their base?"

Shrug.