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.

>>39
Cool slave mentality bro.
Sure. Accepting the fact that I'm not free to smoke wherever I want also demonstrates slave mentality. Or that I'm unfree to take any food I want without paying. Or that I have to fulfil contractual obligations to my employer. Or that I shouldn't shout "Fire" in a crowded theatre. You are such a freethinking rebel, bro!

This is non-sense. Having a choice is not the same as having freedom.
Having a choice is the definition of freedom. No choice -- no freedom. There are a lot of different freedoms, and the freedom to choose which ones to surrender in order to exercise others is amongst the more fundamental ones.

However, since you are brainwashed to the point where you not just reject freedoms not included in the GNU® Freedom™ package, but can't even recognize any of them as freedoms, this discussion seems quite pointless to me.

>>41
Having a choice is the definition of freedom. No choice -- no freedom
No, choice does not mean freedom. If I captured you and ask you how you want to die - electric chair, firing squad, impaling, hang-drawn-quartered, bomb - no choice you make would ever result in your freedom.

>>42
There's no such thing as the freedom, or the state of freedom, you poor brainwashed American. The only way to become absolutely free is to put a bullet through your head.

There are degrees and kinds of freedom though.

Having a choice in the matter of my execution certainly makes me more free than not having such a choice.

When this cruel world captures you and asks to choose between paying your bills or being cut off from the electrical grid, having such a choice makes you more free, both immediately and because you might consider one of the options as yielding more freedoms (or, more important freedoms) than the other, based on your subjective needs and attitudes, so your choice might be different from the one that some unkempt hippie might insist on making for you.

>>43
Having a choice in the matter of my execution certainly makes me more free than not having such a choice.
Cool slave mentality, bro!

>>44
*Giggle*. If I wanted to rob a people of their freedoms, a good start would be to convince them that there are only two possibilites: freedom and slavery, with no gradations between them. Then as I would take their freedoms one by one, with draconian viral licenses and mandatory anal inspections, each time I would point out that it is done in the name of Freedom, and since they are not slaves yet and even have some of their other freedoms somewhat increased, then what I took from them cannot be a real freedom, can't even be called "freedom". And everyone who is concerned about these false freedoms must be an enemy of the Freedom.

To the point where even the idea that there's no such thing as "the Freedom" would sound like an incomprehensible nonsense to my thralls, and they would label an obvious observation that having a choice makes you more free than not having a choice as a product of "slave mentality".

>>45
No, seriously, you have slave mentality. Of course there are gradations of freedom. Freedom to drive on either side of the road is different from the freedom to expect to not have a lot of head-on collisions.

Nevertheless, you suck the cocks of the software overlords. Enjoy proprietary bullshit like the rest of the slaves, drink their loads and ask for more.

>>46
I release all my own code under ASL, you silly cocklover. Implications are left as an exercise for the reader ;P

>>40
I can cite everything the FSF has ever said. Of course they won't just all act evil and tell it the way it is, they talk about freedom with a straight face instead of discussing their values branding in public. But all the citations you'll ever need are here: <sup>[1]

CITATIONS                  
1: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html</sup>