I acknowledge that you take the time and - in stark opposition to many other members of this community over many posts and months - keep a professional stance.

The reason you‘re seeing namecalling is that you‘re nearly alone in communicating in a normal and constructive matter so the the fronts here are hardened a lot.

That said, most hardline folks are either highly privileged (have enough money so they dont have to make money in their time) or plain acting in bad faith (not being developers/contributors/maintainers but having an opinion in the matter).

So, stripping these away, you have a very heterogeneous group which could come to an agreement how to make both sides happy that is not „then use proprietary license“ because thats not fair to people making software you and I can use, change and fix if we so wish.

Besides ideological reasons („if I cant do everything with it its not free“ and „maintainers dont deserve more than one-line-contributors“) there is very little reason to go hard line on this.

And the „coopt open source label“ is also a populist argument because hard lining is coopting the whole thing in its own way. Nobody has the right to choose what a certain chain of words actually is. Language is developing and changes over time.

Mark my words: Being „no negotioation“ on this topic is going to break the whole idea of FOSS and helps corpos and nobody else