This is inefficient and poorly considered. When my family got their first modern computer in my teens it ran windows. When we bought a better one so I could explore computer animation it ran windows. My first computer I paid for dual booted linux/windows. My computers now exclusively run linux.
I switched to free software because it was better ideologically but more importantly because I can presently use it to accomplish my goals.
Dual booting is surely inferior to just running free software from a software freedom standpoint but if I couldn't dual boot I might not have bothered at all.
Making nonfree sofware require an affirmative act beyond apt-install foo is a good step deleting all info from the official platform is unreasonable.
https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html#References
In particular:
> A GNU program should not recommend, promote, or grant legitimacy to the use of any non-free program. Proprietary software is a social and ethical problem, and our aim is to put an end to that problem. We can’t stop some people from writing proprietary programs, or stop other people from using them, but we can and should refuse to advertise them to new potential customers, or to give the public the idea that their existence is ethical.
Excluding material isn't censorship---GNU stands by its principles. You wouldn't expect a vegan organization to advertise means of obtaining meat, for example.
As a project, however, we do not recommend the use of proprietary software and don't provide a platform for advice on how to replace free parts of Guix with non-free software.
The use of proprietary software becomes an ethical problem when network effects are in place. Otherwise, it is the mechanisms of proprietary software itself that we object to, for example the barriers it poses to helping friends or neighbours and the way it gives developers control over the users.
There's many linux distributions and packaging systems where you can easily download proprietary drivers. It's nice that there exists at least one with a firm commitment to free software.
Notice that you can still install proprietary software on top of Guix; they just prefer not to promote it via the official communication channels. That's perfectly reasonable.
Also, even if you do not agree with the above statement, the kernel is unique enough to be granted an exception. If I can't get say sublime text or some proprietary decoder from the repos, that's a tiny annoyance; but if my screen gets funny colours or if I cannot connect to the wireless, that makes it unusable for me. And at that point you're effectively barring me from using free software (but with the exception of a couple blobs that I can totally live with given the status quo), not helping me adopt it. Yes Debian is not as cool (I really like Guix and GuixSD), but at least they are not impeding my day-to-day needs because of extremist morals.
When I asked on the official mailing list for help and was told kindly to f off, that makes me sour enough to say meh, I can use a relatively less interesting distro if it has a better, unconditionally helpful community.
Edit: also it's totally censorship to ban people from saying things they do know and could say.