Git is an abysmal tool for many (most?) uses of it, but that unfortunately has become "standard". The sheer awfulness of git is witnessed by the amount of posts about it and little consensus on "best practices" (e.g., rebase vs merge).
So, I don't judge, but sympathize with people who just "delete the repo and start from scratch". Unintuitive, user-hostile tools call for heavy-handed solutions.
IME, most people are willing to learn something when they're shown the value for invested effort. That "delete the repo" is standard answer for fixing f*up, tells more about the tool than the people using it. (I.e. it requires disproportionately big investment of time for little value.)
So, I don't judge, but sympathize with people who just "delete the repo and start from scratch". Unintuitive, user-hostile tools call for heavy-handed solutions.
IME, most people are willing to learn something when they're shown the value for invested effort. That "delete the repo" is standard answer for fixing f*up, tells more about the tool than the people using it. (I.e. it requires disproportionately big investment of time for little value.)