Defining Free Software Business

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

   'We acknowledge that some of our users require the use of works
   that do not conform to the Debian Free Software Guidelines. We have
   created "contrib" and "non-free" areas in our archive for these
   works. The packages in these areas are not part of the Debian
   system, although they have been configured for use with Debian.' --
   http://www.fr.debian.org/social_contract

Thanks, so once and for all the issue of Debian recommending and
supporting non-free software is put to a rest.  It does so, and it is
intentional.

   The addition of Sun Java to Debian has not been condoned.  Another
   wild accusation without evidence.

Obviously it was condoned, it was added.  As you quoted the SC
yourself, non-free software is explictly part of Debian.  So there was
nothing really wrong with adding Sun Java to Debian, or any other
non-free software that exists in the non-free group of Debian.

   I expect GNU does host non-free software somewhere, but I don't
   know whether ftp.microsoft.com runs GNU, so I don't see the
   relevance of that.

Where?  Where does the GNU project host non-free software?  I have
asked you now several times, please show me where the GNU project
hosts non-free software.

   No, debian does not recommend or depend on non-free software.
   (debian-policy s2.2.1, yet again) 

>From the SC: 'We acknowledge that some of our users require the use of
works that do not conform to the Debian Free Software Guidelines. We
have created "contrib" and "non-free" areas in our archive for these
...'.  So you are saying that the SC is violating the Debian policies
or the other way around?

   Anywhere where non-free software for GNU is run.  Odd question.

Non-free software for GNU?  What kind of software is that?  Can you
show concrete examples?

   The CDs are debian.  They are the ultimate action of the debian
   project.

The CD's are a method to distribute parts of Debian.  You quoted the
SC: 'We acknowledge that some of our users require the use of works
that do not conform to the Debian Free Software Guidelines. We have
created "contrib" and "non-free" areas in our archive for these ...'
Clearly, non-free software is part of Debian.  You cannot dispute it,
you are just trying to weasle your way around by redefining things as
you see fit.

   > I'd go on an equal rampage if the FSF started doing the same.

   I somewhat doubt it, but I hope we never find out.

Why do you doubt it?  Why are you on a constant basis trying to start
throwing mud at me?  I'm frankly sick and tired of it! Stop it!