But don't you want users to choose free software consciously, having considered your arguments that non-free software is "unethical and immoral", and actively agreed with them? If users end up using free software simply by happenstance, because you prevented them from finding non-free software, then they haven't really accepted your arguments. How does that constitute the spread of FSF ideas? An idea is accepted when alternative ideas have been seriously considered and consciously rejected, not when alternative ideas were prevented from being explored.
So the value of mentioning non-free software, along with a pointer to the reasons not to use it, is to ensure that any decision to use free software is made deliberately and consciously, after genuine acceptance of FSF ideas. On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 12:21 PM, Alfred M. Szmidt <a...@gnu.org> wrote: > We don't point users to non-free software because such software is > unethical and immoral. So there is little point in mentioning it. _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss