[mort96]

Okay but a major point of the post, whether you agree or not, is that Stallman's views is harming the technical merits of GNU software, making copyleft software less competitive than it should be. That's not going to change just because you start a new organization which tries to evangelize for Free Software in a better way.

[Andrew_nenakhov]

Well I agree that it is a major point of the post. An no, I don't agree with this major point, in that Stallman's views somehow harm GNU anything. Anyone who believes he can do a better job can try doing a better job. But for some reason most such critics want Stallman do a job according to their expectations. No, it is not how it works.

I also find Stallman's position on a contributor/project head positions imbalance to be perfectly reasonable. Contributor has to convince project head to do something. Project head doesn't need to do that. If a contributor is unhappy, he can fork the project, become the head himself (with all the problems that such position brings), and do a better job.

[selfhoster11]

Nothing prevents such future FSF successor organisation from forking all GNU projects and setting a different contribution policy or whatever. You won’t be able to change/upgrade the licensing terms unless you get the blessing from FSF itself, but then, Linux seems to be managing fine on GPLv2 so maybe it’s not such a big issue.