This might be an unpopular opionion, but anyone who feels that Stallmans antics make him unfit for leading the FSF is also not someone I want have any say in that organizsation. It shows a lack of ability to discern between message and messanger, as well as private and professional opinion.

He is the single most consistent arbiter of open source, clinging to views we all here admire; With such a dedication that it is hard to imagine ANYONE, even fictional, who would be better suited for that particular position (head of FSF).

Aleniating people is in and of itself not a problem for a leader, it works the same way in any other area: Would you want to attract people to Black Lives Matter who would be alienated by Martin Luther King? Do you really find it problematic that the buddhists don't try to attract people who can't stand the Dalai Lama?

Is it really a Problem that the FSF didn't attract people who would critizise Stallman ONLY on points which have no bearing on the mission of the FSF?

And the article really makes a great point about how most of that criticism consists of misrepresentation, faulty analysis and double standards. Keeping people like that out of the FSF is not only fine by me, it is absolute paramount to keep it working.