> McLuhan argues that there is value for FOSS in FSF remaining independent and "radical". I didn't say the opposite. My point is that the FSF shouldn't be so s

> McLuhan argues that there is value for FOSS in FSF remaining independent and "radical". I didn't say the opposite. My point is that the FSF shouldn't be so sure they are the most radical out there. People more radical than them also criticize them. It's easy dismissing critics by saying they come from people with somehow "compromised" opinions, but it doesn't address any of the critics.