Or maybe he should had restricted the foundation's mission scope to solely open source software and not tie everything into a progressive endeavor. Your culture

Or maybe he should had restricted the foundation's mission scope to solely open source software and not tie everything into a progressive endeavor. Your culture determines everything. Collective action and employee protests at Google is very different than at Amazon/Microsoft. If RMS had tied his personal brand to FSF's success, then he would have easily weathered the coup attempts. This is basic executive power MBA 101. During the massive corporate adoption of open source post-2010 he could have restructured the foundation to make it more scalable like the Linux Foundation or Wikimedia, a force unto itself with cash reserves and endowments. But he didn't, I think he has learnt an important lesson this time. The FSF is a startup that never grew beyond the "scrappy entrepreneur in garage" phase. Starbucks has a much better chance of surviving collective action than your average neighborhood kombucha café place.