I'm not going to go line by line, but you could start with this:
Proprietary software is associated with malicious treatment of the user
I don't believe 99% of people out there associate proprietary software with malicious treatment.
Proprietary software is associated with malicious treatment of the user
I don't believe 99% of people out there associate proprietary software with malicious treatment.
Even on a narrower definition of malicious if it includes user tracking/monitoring then large amounts of proprietary software can be regarded as malicious. I would narrow my definition of malicious a little more personally but there are large amounts of fairly malicious software out there, very little of it Free software.
You might need to pick another line to take apart.
"Where is my child?" => "I'm sorry ma'am, we had a day trip, but in the interests of your child's freedoms, I was forbidden from tracking her."
Most Linux users might not buy into a boycott of Ubuntu -- in that sense they reject RMS's ideology.
But I think few would argue that proprietary software does tend towards bullshit -- the very DRM and the like that RMS is calling malicious. They might not go around calling it malicious, but they wouldn't consider RMS's attitude there extreme, just the actions he advocates.
And malicious has strong connotations..e.g malware, spyware, which most "linux users" wouldn't necessarily apply to developers of legit proprietary software.
If he can't communicate his ideas in a calm and balanced way, perhaps those ideas don't have as much value as he thinks they do. Sorry, but method of delivery counts for a lot.
Whether or not I agree with it I found it quite calm and balanced (just like the phrase quoted above). Note there are no insults or exclamation points.
Perhaps his writing isn't the issue here, but your perception.