I don't mean that they voice their opinion that RMS behavior is a problem, that is not strange.
What I mean is strange is that the GNOME Foundation does it through that "open letter" given how it is phrased and how it references inaccurate sources in the appendix. I saw you wrote about that earlier so I think you understand what I mean. Otherwise see how the problems with the open letter are explained here: https://edsantos.eu/on-stalman/
1/2
@clacke If you have time, I would be interested to hear what you think about those things (see also above):
- The GNOME Foundation signing the "open letter" as a whole organization, given how it is phrased and how it references inaccurate sources in the appendix.
- The GNOME Foundation signing something that would have been a clear violation of the GNOME code of conduct if posted in their own space.
For me it's hard to understand how they could do that, I really wonder what is behind it.