Re: Support RMS

[quiliro]

Danny Spitzberg <stationaery@gmail.com> writes:

> Ali, I’m disappointed but not surprised you came to that conclusion yet
> again. The history seems to be the opposite: FSF staff organized a union
> because RMS was causing harm and dysfunction, and at best, RMS went along
> and accepted it as a net positive state of affairs.

Does all FSF support your view or is it just a hunch of yours?