I strongly disagree with this “punchline”, especially the word “only”. I think in moderate doses having monophyletic groups which don’t match users preconceptions is a great way to make users more engaged with nature. When I learned cetaceans should really be considered ungulates, because they descend from hooved animals, I was not put off or frustrated, I instead thought this was very cool and wanted to learn more!
I think there is a balance to be struck here, I agree it may be very destructive and confusing to include birds under reptiles on iNaturalist but I think most of this so called “phylogenetic pedantry” presents a great way to get people more curious about the natural world.