Well, hold up, let's clarify what's meant by "do wrong." A lot of people deeply involved with the free software and open source movement(s), including people w

Well, hold up, let's clarify what's meant by "do wrong." A lot of people deeply involved with the free software and open source movement(s), including people who worked at the FSF, had been unhappy with him as a leader for a long time. https://wingolog.org/archives/2019/10/08/thoughts-on-rms-and-gnu https://wingolog.org/archives/2019/10/08/thoughts-on-rms-and... (GNU project maintainer, summarizing - with links - views of other GNU maintainners) and http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2019/10/15/fsf-rms.html http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2019/10/15/fsf-rms.html (long-time FSF staff, Conservancy cofounder, and 2021 FSF awardee) are good places to start reading. Or see how FSF staff unionized (unusually for tech!) to protect themselves from him (https://twitter.com/paulnivin/status/1374532930400227328 https://twitter.com/paulnivin/status/1374532930400227328 , https://twitter.com/NovalisDMT/status/1172573166956437505 https://twitter.com/NovalisDMT/status/1172573166956437505). It's true that that blog post (which was not anonymous, there's a name on it???) is what catalyzed something to actually happen, and you can dispute whether the blog post by itself merited anything. And - largely because these were things that a small group of people were trying to handle internally (did you know that the FSF staff are unionized?) - there didn't seem to be much public discussion beyond that one blog post. The GNU maintainers' mailing list is private, the discussions between FSF board members are private, etc. So, it certainly looked to the casual observer like it was a single blog post. But that wasn't the reality.