> On another hand we are not GNU/GPL and we don't mind our users installing > non free software if it is what they want. The FAQ is where this needs to > be documented for users to get their job done faster. >
If you don't mind users using non-free software, you shouldn't be putting the 'Free. ' in 'Free. Functional. Secure.'; You shouldn't be fighting those blob vendors and call them nasty names; Rather, probably document how to use such drivers and firmware 'faster'. Then you shouldn't be making a claim that 'OpenBSD supports openness'. If you can manipulate your reasons for making this ethical, you shouldn't be calling others names. And you shouldn't bring back ethics' dead body around your neck. > > > On a more serious note: everybody who criticizes the other of non-free > > software must come clean first: No clean, no talk. > > > > one who criticizes the other should come informed too. > And the rest who do should avoid red herring arguments and accept what they are doing. In other words, they should say: 'I am wrong. I will fix the problem at my end. Your turn now.' I don't see anybody doing it. Don't you see how you're not doing anything but complaining? It doesn't make this any different. > -- > Gilles Chehade > -- Karthik http://guilt.bafsoft.net
