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
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Reply via email to