I may not have all of the background information, but reading the open letter against the FSF board: https://rms-open-letter.github.io/ https://rms-open-letter

I may not have all of the background information, but reading the open letter against the FSF board: https://rms-open-letter.github.io/ https://rms-open-letter.github.io/ and the incidents they cite: https://rms-open-letter.github.io/appendix https://rms-open-letter.github.io/appendix I find that the signatories seem to be conflating expressions of opinion with action, and demand extreme action in the face of a collection of statements-of-opinion which they disagree with. But even this is not the worst part of the demand: The letter is not really targeting RMS - it targets anyone who is willing to _tolerate_ RMS, and specifically the FSF board. It is imperative IMHO that this initiative be fended off, unless you'd like an FSF - and other NGOs - which shudders in fear at the thought of making statements or taking positions which are not in-line enough with mainstream politics. And they will be sure to police each other, since a rhetorical vice by one is a capital offense by all. And that's all before getting into RMS' neuro-atypicality; and the fact that board membership is not management of the FSF; etc. I just don't think the appropriate defense here should focus on RMS.