The most twisted distored, bizarre criticism of this website is that the GPL 2 has been misunderstood by GNG; when Stallman says "FREE OF CHARGE" right in the license, this doesn't mean free of charge software at all, it really means, that the GPL license itself is free of charge, not the software, or the licensing process itself is free of charge but the software you can charge whatever you want for.
Are people stupid? (rhetorical question. Yes). Stallman clearly demands GPL 2 software to be FREE OF CHARGE, i.e. freeware, right in the GPL section mentioned all over this website. People have the nerve to think that Stallman is talking about free of charge GPL license text, not the software! Right, because the license is not speaking about the software, it's a license recursively speaking about a license about a license?
Are people morons? Either way, this won't hold up in the court system, and your lawyer would have to be retarded to interpret the license in such a way that FREE OF CHARGE doesn't apply to the software, but the process of licensing itself. Stallman, in his personal interviews, documented as quotes all over this site, has admitted several times he wants a FREEWARE society, without money, and he put it right in his license. People have the nerve to criticize GNG as misinterpreting the "license" when in fact it is the GNUtard cult members that have misinterpreted the license to mean whatever they want, depending on the time of day and how drunk they are.
Basically, using 1984 logic where 2+2 = whatever you want it to be (not always 5), you can twist and distort the GPL to mean whatever you want, like interpretting the bible or the quran. In science, we call this falsifiability. The GPL is not falsifiable, i.e. it doesn't mean jack shit and doesn't hold up in any court because the license is full of Brown Sugar, as are its cult members.