> The EFF's analysis is generally of the advocacy sort. Nothing wrong with that of course, but it's important to recognize that. This is a really subtle and ef

> The EFF's analysis is generally of the advocacy sort. Nothing wrong with that of course, but it's important to recognize that. This is a really subtle and effective way to attack EFF as uncredible, and I don't respect that. Let's recognize some other important things: - the EFF is not an advocacy-only organization, but fights dozens of actual legal battles every single year - As a highly effective, currently-practicing, often-winning legal organization who uses advocacy as a part of their legal efforts, they are bound by realism when talking. The idea that the EFF exaggerates for advocacy is offensive and frankly, I'm calling it a "lie" unless you can source that. They are not fast-talking liars. They fight these battles in actual courts all across the country -- and win. That demonstrates that their arguments are more that pop-advocacy, they're the well reasoned arguments of lawyers winning cases. Frankly, the EFF doesn't take up a cause they don't legally believe in.