Maybe I'm just oblivious to the underlying tone of what I've been reading, or I haven't been reading the right things, but I don't think I've seen the FSF say "

Maybe I'm just oblivious to the underlying tone of what I've been reading, or I haven't been reading the right things, but I don't think I've seen the FSF say "to hell with you" or anything similar to people who don't choose to act exactly in the way they promote. If you have to use Facebook because of the consequences on your social life from not using it, that's understandable, but then there's nothing the FSF can do for you aside from recommending a few addons. This doesn't mean "to hell with you", it literally means "there's nothing we can do for you". As for Stallman, has he really been showing contempt for users of non-free software? He dislikes proprietary software and actively campaigns against it, and this involves writing about their problems without holding back, but I've never gotten the sense that he has contempt for the users. Even when he uses the word "useds" to refer to Facebook users, I've never gotten the sense that he has actual contempt for users of Facebook. I get that it can be insulting, but I don't think it was meant that way. It's just Stallman trying to get his point about Facebook across and ending up being abrasive about it. Also Stallman is not uncompromising. He believes in freedom and is working to maximise it, but along the way he's used non-free software when there were no alternatives (the most recent example being BIOS some number of years ago), has promoted non-strict free licenses in some cases, allowed the LGPL/GPL/AGPL instead of just making everything maximally protected with the AGPL, etc. He compromises a lot less than most on the issue, that's true, but that's because it's literally his mission.