[Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news

[Josh Branning]

On 16/08/16 20:14, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

>I certainly wouldn't mix
> "respects your freedom" and "the FSF's respect your freedom certification".

So what would you say instead; that is, for a device that is completely 
free in software terms, but hasn't been through the FSF's certification 
process?

___________________________________________________________________

... Either way, I think the conversation is diverging a bit from your 
(IMO) completely valid and excellent point that the parabola news 
article is somewhat misleading, and should really be corrected 
(especially now that we've realised that we can't even find the pdf of 
schematics for the EOMA68 when "libre hardware" is mentioned).