The point of an ideological project (or any project, really) is to try and get everyone pulling in the same direction. GNU/FSF is an organization for one specific ideal: free software. It's not intended as a vehicle for any random ideal people care about.

>It's not intended as a vehicle for any random ideal people care about.

Who used it like that? Stallman's comments happened outside the organization, the tweet was from someone I think unrelated to the project. I can understand keeping other ideals out of the project, but in context you're telling people not to express other ideals.

> the tweet was from someone I think unrelated to the project

Seems fine for unrelated Twitter randos to say whatever they want about RMS, but would be distracting and counterproductive for GNU/FSF to permanently ban RMS in support of Twitter randos' unrelated ideals. I never said or implied anything about stopping Twitter randos from expressing or doing whatever they want.

I was asking you who used it as a vehicle... as the two people directly being discussed had not. I did not think you were trying to stop random people on twitter.

I think you're answering that GNU/FSF used it improperly but am not certain.

Yes, the people working for GNU/FSF started using GNU/FSF to punish RMS in support of other ideals. Twitter randos may have talked about it but it's up to the GNU/FSF to focus & act on it.

... in the name of the organization.

And RMS's "pleasure cards" listing his office address and organizational email certainly indicate that his private activities are the organizations activities.

Yes, he should have been reprimanded for using the organization's name to make a bad joke seemingly decades ago.

Basic compartmentalization. If i have ideological goals A, B, C, then i can work on goal A with people who are indifferent or against B, C, and also work on goal B with people who are indifferent or against A, C, instead of trying to find people in intersection of A, B, C.

I doubt people can compartmentalize things that are in vehement disagreement with their core values.

Would Stallman work on implementing a DRM?

And not in this case, but what about someone denying the other’s existence? Actively supporting groups that work on restricting someone’s basic rights? (Mozilla with Eich)

> Would Stallman work on implementing a DRM?

It is a big difference working on A with people i disagree about B, and actively working against one's values. I can work with non-vegetarians on software, but i would not work in slaughterhouse.

> And not in this case, but what about someone denying the other’s existence?

As an LGBT person (and pro same-sex marriage), i think that mixing up 'being against same-sex marriage' and 'denying the other’s existence' is just horrible rhetorical device, fear-mongering about opponent's position.