As above, I'll cede she has a few valid points. Invariant sections should not
block changes which are clearly indicated as not being the author's own
words, and allowing some variation in documentation formats would be nice.
But seriously, "extremism"? The people who changed the world were never
mainstream thinkers- the "open sources" of various movements have served an
important role, granted, but it's the people who won't compromise on their
values who change the world. If you aren't willing to suffer any form of
hatred or sacrifice for your beliefs, you aren't going to be the one who
makes them a reality. It's only because Stallman is so stubborn, pedantic,
and uncompromising that we can even dream of software freedom.
If you don't want to be associated with the kind of uncompromising
willingness that built GNU (and Libreboot, may I point out) or the kind of
constant forking that allows free software to remain truly secure and
trustworthy in a way proprietary software could never approach, that's fine.
I have no objections, and I honestly wish you the best in your ambitions. But
please call yourself an open-source advocate, not a free software advocate.