Not even this. There's no "logical" argument against it. The CSS color names are largely arbitrary and always have been (e.g. "indigo" is a shade of purple, when IRL indigo is the plant that produces the dye for blue jeans). Color names in general have been arbitrary since long before Newton coined ROYGBIV and decided to use "blue" to mean what we call "cyan" today.
It's an attitude that presumes that we can apply logic to all walks of life, which ironically is an inherently illogical stance.
Yeah, that's the main oversight of the OP that makes them look silly.
There was no logic to the naming scheme. It was all arbitrary, and the names came in waves from various sources like house paint colors, Crayolas, and the whims of people behind various implementations.
If they replaced '#663399' with 'rebeccapurple' maybe they'd have a point.
It's an attitude that presumes that we can apply logic to all walks of life, which ironically is an inherently illogical stance.