Non-free software shouldn't be mentioned

If you put a statement before the first thread, saying “Our policy is not to identify non-free programs, since doing so could lead more people to use them, and we would thus be contributing to their success” then it will be easy to explain. Just send the person a copy of that text, saying, “This is stated in the front page.”

Definitely Prog should say that non-free software is bad, but one can do this without mentioning any specific non-free program. In fact, that makes it more powerful.

While this kind of statement makes it clear you don’t think the non-free program is a good thing, readers who encounter the mention the non-free program might still go and use it anyway. A reader for whom freedom is not a priority might ignore the site’s negative opinion, follow the link, and become a customer for the program. If you don’t mention the specific program, this can’t happen.

Most users in our community have never even heard the idea that non-free software is ethically bad. They have only heard of the open source movement and its values; they think our goal is simply to make software “better” (technically). So this statement is important. To make it as visible as possible, I’d suggest putting it in every thread.

All we have is non-free hardware, non-free designs, non-free processes, non-free plastic cases, non-free machines. We drive non-free cars, we apply non-free chemicals in our clothes and in our bodies, we take in non-free medicines, we eat non-free food, we drink non-free soda. We invest in non-free funds, we are ruled by a non-free constitution -- or one that no one reads anyway, delegating our "freedom" to a lawyer --, we join non-free therapy groups, we even read non-free books -- who will assure the "freedom" in its contents?

Free software?

Why bother? Everything we consume in a sense is non-free.

Our "freedom" is just a well-told lie.