I'm not in the group that's allowed to vote on this, but I do feel compelled to comment, non-the-less.
I respect (and approve of) the fact that Debian makes a distinction between "free" and "non-free" software, and encourages people to -- when possible -- use only free software. I think it's a shame for manufacturers to not make source code freely available of the drivers for their hardware. But sadly I can't change that. So if I were king, I'd advocate for Debian to continue the distinction between "free" and "non-free" software. If you want to use less emotionally loaded terms, feel free to advocate for yourself. But I'm with Juliet: "What's in a name? A rose by any other name would smell as sweet." However, again if I were king, I'd like to see the "unofficial" installers better advertised than they are now. If you want to drop the "unofficial" designation, I refer you to Juliet again. Burying it at the bottom of the page in teeny-tiny print doesn't help new users with proprietary wi-fi hardware and no ethernet. Move the text from the bottom of the page to where it's visible as an equally valid option to the other installation choices. Hope it helps! Rick PS: I use the "official" installers when I can, and only switch to the "unofficial" installers when I have to. However, I usually enable the "contrib non-free" options in sources.list after installation. If that helps to see where I'm coming from.
