> Obviously if you view things differently, you can vote your conscience.
This sounds like (and this is really a popular opinion inside and outside
Debian) the FSF is the problem, not just RMS, and it's not clear to me
whether anything will be actually fixed if RMS holds fewers positions
inside FSF.
I've read many comments on this subject, and this is the closest that one has come to the question I've not seen asked yet: Will Debian continue to support and partner with the FSF if Rms leaves or stays?
There seems to be a lot of doubt about the FSF's operations itself, current and historical, and not all of it due to Rms. This discussion has served for some to highlight issues people have (including that FSF appears to like criticising Debian).
One wonders if the bigger picture is being missed. When the mob has finished speaking and is standing outside Frankenstein's castle clutching their torches and pitchforks, hearts filled with righteousness. What happens then?
So - Are the FSF's objectives AND methods compatible with Debian?
If not, then the rms issue as far as Debian is concerned is moot. No need for badly written open letters. No need for shaming. No need for a witch hunt. Just a brief statement that the FSF's ideals and operations are incompatible with Debian's.
If they are compatible, then they are no matter who is at the helm - that's likely to be Rms by the way - if they haven't acted yet, it's likely they'll continue as they are. Thick skins and no shareholders.
S