What does "unbiased" mean in the context of a group that has a stated advocacy purpose?

Why would we expect or want anything else?

You're free to act or not upon the EFF's urging - but at least they're honest about their goals.

They misrepresent views and lie about legislation.

What's honest about that?

What misrepresentation? What lies?

FWIW, I've read some other articles about this bill, and my opinion of it has improved slightly since reading the EFF brief here.

Last time I paid attention to what the EFF had to say, they were spewing lies and propaganda about CISPA.

That's some nice citations there, buddy. Burden of proof doesn't fall on the accused.

I don't feel obligated to spend time defending my position.

If you're interested, I recommend you check out the EFF's press releases about CISPA, and then compare it to what's on Wikipedia. They just make a number of legal leaps that aren't founded in any kind of law, amounting to a fearmongering argument no more valid than screaming, "BUT FREEDOM!!!!" too loudly for anyone else to object.

Taking a stand on an issue is not the same thing as partisianship.

As opposed to...?

I guess you are expecting the EFF to be neutral with regard to NSA snooping and data collection, versus NSA not doing any of those things. That's not a reasonable ask, though.

I'm just expecting honesty, is all. I don't feel the EFF is honest in its approach to its stances, and that makes me worry that their positions aren't defensible.