[globular-toast]

I just don't understand the severe misunderstanding that results in one thinking that what Stallman advocates would impose severe restrictions. I'd love you to think about what you mean so I can see where you're going wrong. It's honestly that far out from my understanding of reality I can't begin to comprehend what you're thinking.

[dEnigma]

If you actually tried and really can't see how living by the gospel of Stallman would impose severe restrictions on how you use your computer then I'm afraid I can't help you. Still, a few examples to illustrate

I wouldn't be able to use Word attachments (https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html)

I wouldn't be able to use Windows (https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/upgrade-windows.html)

I wouldn't be able to package useful non-free software for my Linux distro (https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/compromise.html)

I would have to call the Linux distro a "GNU/Linux distro" (https://www.gnu.org/gnu/why-gnu-linux.html)

I would have to ideally stop, but at least reduce, my usage of WhatsApp, Facebook, Slack, etc. (https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/saying-no-even-once.html)

These are just all-in-all minor examples I could find in a couple of minutes on gnu.org. I remember reading much more radical takes by Stallman and his companions, but would have to spend more time searching for them.

[globular-toast]

Do you understand there's a difference between advocacy and imposition? Stallman recommends you don't do those things because they all surreptitiously undermine your freedom to use your computer.

During the civil rights movement black people were encouraged to not use the buses while segregation was in place. You'd be the guy complaining about how difficult it would be to get around without the bus.

Sometimes the way forward involves going back to fix the wrongs of the past. People like Stallman see the world from a higher dimension. He isn't living on flatland like you and me. There is no world where proprietary software and computing freedom can coexist. If there was you can bet Stallman would be advocating the shortest path to such a world.

[dEnigma]

I don't think we are necessarily in disagreement here, so I'm not sure how to respond. I never said that Stallman was exerting power over me to get me to live by his standards, just that I would have to change and restrict the way I use software and which software I use if I (voluntarily) followed all his recommendations. As I've said in my original post I even respect his commitment and perseverance in this regard and think they lead to a better outcome for everyone, but I'm unwilling to follow his example out of laziness and convenience.