Pardon my ignorance, but if you rebase while on master, are you not changing the master branch history for everyone? Isn't the point of the golden rule to not be re-writing the history of public branches?
Again it troubles me that even the language of Git is sometimes ambiguous.
I feel that there should not be a 'golden rule' of something that should never be done - it's a flaw in the product. It simply should not be possible, or at least not with someone without super-admin rights.
I feel Git is very much an administrative level tool, and that there should be something else for devs; something that is fairly obvious, consistent, encourages/forces the org. the policy and makes it so that devs don't have to think to much and really hard to screw up. Admins can give special privileges to the 'true experts' on an as-needed basis.
