> I see a lot of ways in which this is harmful to the cause. I'm trying to understand your meaning. You went on to say: > You can keep long-term goals in mind

> I see a lot of ways in which this is harmful to the cause. I'm trying to understand your meaning. You went on to say: > You can keep long-term goals in mind while also working towards smaller short-term goals. Almost every political party and lobby organisation in the world is doing exactly that. But every example of such political parties/organizations I can think of (in my experience) has 'puritanical' wings that serve to establish the key direction. > It's not explaining the message very well, it's actively turning people off, and it's preventing some free software from being as useful as it could be. I was unable to follow your logic. Perhaps actual example of this happening would be useful. > By focusing only on the endpoint you're actually doing more short-term thinking rather than playing the long game. Forgive me, but it appears like you're focusing on practically achievable goals rather than having a long term plan. If Ubuntu continued along its current path of just partnering with vendors, only "they" being able to build the signed boot images that machines boot, then it is not unreasonable to suspect that at some point users will lose all ability to build their own kernel for their machine.