> In particular, see http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/freedom-or-power.html.
yeah, right.
> Since I consider non-free software to be unethical and antisocial,
LOL
> I think it would be wrong for me to recommend it to others. Therefore,
> if a collection of software contains (or suggests installation of)
> some non-free program, I do not recommend it. The systems I recommend
> are therefore those that do not contain (or suggest installation of)
> non-free software.
Therefore, you don't recommend linux. Oh wait ...
> From what I have heard,
(and carefully checked on the project's official
website to make sure I don't spread bullshit),
> OpenBSD does not contain non-free software (though I am not sure
> whether it contains any non-free firmware blobs).
Unlike linux, it does not.
> However, its ports
> system does suggest non-free programs,
No it doesn't "suggest" non-free programs in any way;
it just makes it possible and easy to install them.
As you well know.
> or > at least so I was told when I looked for some BSD variant that I could
> recommend.
Hm, you was told. Now one paragraph above you was told
the opposite. Does that confuse you?
> I therefore exercise my freedom of speech by not including
> OpenBSD in the list of systems that I recommend to the public.
Good for you! Your freedom of speech was once again in jeopardy,
perhaps forcing you to include OpenBSD in the list of "software
recommended by RMS." But it's over now, don't worry. Write a book
about it instead.
> The fact that OpenBSD is not a variant of GNU is not ethically
> important. If OpenBSD did not suggest non-free programs, I would
> recommend it along with the free GNU/Linux distros.
As not being recommended byt RMS basically means an EOL
of any sytem, I will deinstall tonight to be on the safe side.
(I think I can guess a line or two of the 4.3 song)
Jan
