On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 10:18:47AM -0500, Richard Stallman wrote:

quoted text
> It looks like some people are having a discussion in which they

> construct views they would find outrageous, attribute them to me, and

> then try to blame me for them.

>

> For such purposes, knowledge of my actual views might be superfluous,

> even inconvenient.  However, if anyone wants to know what I do think,

> I've stated it in various articles in http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/.

> In particular, see http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/freedom-or-power.html.

*yawn*
>

quoted text
> One question particularly relevant for this list is why I don't

> recommend OpenBSD.  It is not about what the system allows.  (Any

> general purpose system allows doing anything at all.)  It is about

> what the system suggests to the user.

What you recommend is quite boring what is not boring is your lack of

research into this topic.  It's ok to not know what you are talking

about; it is not ok to make blanket statements based on hearsay.
>

quoted text
> Since I consider non-free software to be unethical and antisocial, 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.

OpenBSD is by far the most free OS in the landscape.  Everything that

ships with it is free or else it won't be distributed with it.  There is

not a single open source OS out there that is more careful than OpenBSD

on licensing, copyrights and frivolous patents.  We actually have

standards.
>

quoted text
> From what I have heard, OpenBSD does not contain non-free software

> (though I am not sure whether it contains any non-free firmware

> blobs).  However, its ports system does suggest non-free programs, or

> at least so I was told when I looked for some BSD variant that I could

> recommend.  I therefore exercise my freedom of speech by not including

> OpenBSD in the list of systems that I recommend to the public.

Unlinke linux OpenBSD does not contain proprietary firmware blobs in the

distribution.  Unlike linux OpenBSD does not have a HAL.  I can go on

for a while.
>

quoted text
> I could recommend OpenBSD privately with a clear conscience to someone

> I know will not install those non-free programs, but it is rare that I

> am asked for such recommendations, and I know of no practical reason

> to prefer OpenBSD to gNewSense.

Here is one, the code isn't bloated and doesn't mostly suck.  I find it

unethical to recommend a steaming pile of crap to someone.
>

quoted text
> 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.

> 

Speaking of strawman arguments; this is such an insult to ones

intelligence.  You are basically saying: "you are retarded if you don't

let me tell you what you want".