I don't prefer to call it that. In fact, it's almost the exact opposite of technical debt, which is generally the result of trying to change things too much, too quickly.
Having stable conventions that account for edge cases that are addressed sufficiently to the point that we don't have to think about them is an asset, not debt, and the principle of Chesterton's Fence ought to always be applied when proposing changes that drastically alter long-established conventions.
