That's why I asked his reasoning for taking such a hardline stance on the Gnu/Linux terminology ;) I don't know how much Gnu is in Ubuntu, nor how much the average person uses Gnu (I'm a sysadmin, I use it constantly). A different discussion is whether or not Gnu can be removed from say Desktop Ubuntu (I think someone else posted a similar question about how much Gnu can be taken out to just call the OS "Linux").

If I recall, it *should* be Gnu/Linux because the OS is comprised of the Gnu tools & the Linux kernel, so Ubuntu is a distribution of Gnu/Linux. Personally, I got into the habit of saying "Linux" because that's how I was introduced to the OS, and it was years before I learned the distinction betwixt Gnu/Linux and Linux.

Ahoy! I've heard that in the past you've refused to participate on podcasts and such unless the hosts mandate that other guests in the discussion always use "Gnu/Linux" (when speaking of the OS) and "Linux" (when speaking of the kernel) during the discussion. If this is true, why take such a hardline stance and refuse to participate when instead you could participate and correct/explain other's usage of the terms? Even if you didn't convince the other speakers, wouldn't you have had the opportunity to reach a wider audience, and spread your ideas (as well as the correct usage of Gnu/Linux & Linux) to that audience?