I would say your comment (which is currently the top comment on this post) thread is not far off from what cwbrandsma is somewhat hyperbolically saying.
> It always struck me as borderline scummy, since GitHub was of course aware of this, but then again they've knowingly benefited from misconceptions about the Git/GitHub relationship for a long time
To me that very much implies the thought out plan to place github as the defacto git repo that cwbrandsma was describing.
It's not that there was some evil master plan from the beginning, it's that GitHub benefits from git/GitHub confusion (such as hosting git.io), knows this (at least nowadays), and passively encourages this by doing nothing about it.
> It always struck me as borderline scummy, since GitHub was of course aware of this, but then again they've knowingly benefited from misconceptions about the Git/GitHub relationship for a long time
To me that very much implies the thought out plan to place github as the defacto git repo that cwbrandsma was describing.