It is, in a way, funny. The usual clueless keyword droppers are there (jedi, for example), but also some smart guys (Dyson).
The short version is that apparently Dyson and a couple of others made a rather thought provoking statement: "The GPL is not free", and are defending it.
The usual wisdom about it is that such a position is indefensible, yet IMHO they are doing just fine.
I just snip from the sidelines pointing out the internal inconsistencies between people who sustain the opposing position (that the GPL is actually free).
I got several interesting responses, like "of course the GPL doesn't prevent linking GPL and non-GPL software".
Strangely, as soon as I point out that the FSF says it does, a couple of posters fall off the subthread, and get replaced by a couple of new posters saying that it does.
Then I point ways in which that position makes the GPL non-free, and the reverse happens :-)
So, my personal guess is that it's impossible for a single person to maintain both halves of that position at the same time without internal conflict.