Richard Stallman wrote:
quoted text
>     Developing a program ( real software ) for a non-free platform is big
>     encouragement by loud communication ( actions speak better than words
>     ) to use or continue using that non-free platform.
>
> There are two issues here: the practical effects, and the message conveyed.
>
> The practical effects are mixed.  Making free apps run on non-free
> systems paves the way for some users to migrate to free systems, and
> for some users eliminates a motivation to migrate.  

quoted text
> So it has both
> good and bad effects.  I don't know which effect is bigger, but I
> speculate that the good effect is bigger over all.  The negative
> effect is limited to power users, people who might switch systems as
> if it were an easy thing to do.  Most users are reluctant to change
> operating systems at all.
>   
Please review (and correct) my logic deduction:

1. negative effect is power users (you said)
2. power users are able to change OS (you said)
3. all people that use a compiler are power users.. only advanced users 
run a compiler
4. all MsWin gcc users are power users because of above point
5. the negative effect is therefore all MsWin GCC users
6. since the negative effect is all MSwin gcc users.. MsWin GCC is negative
7. GCC is to be removed from MSWin, since it is overall negative.

Where did I go wrong?

Or what is the reason for power users being negative?
Power users are advanced users... people that can switch operating 
systems. Their bundled OS with their computer can be changed - they are 
advanced enough to not fear changing bundled OS. So.... is it negative 
for power users to run GCC.. because they should be running a free OS 
since they know they can install one? i.e. they are abusing their GCC 
since they are using windows even though they know they can run an OS 
like gNewSense?

Since RMS you said that the negative effect is power users - I'm saying 
that since all MsWin GCC users are power users, then MsWin GCC users are 
all affecting FSF negatively. Because the logic deduction is that power 
users are affecting GNU negatively.. so if compiler users are power 
users.. then the logic is that all GCC windows compiler folks are 
negative.. and gcc needs to be removed? Where am I wrong or what am I 
not seeing that you see? Why do you think power users are negatively 
affecting GNU, for example?