Yeah, obviously, Free Software vendors can support themselves in certain ways, chiefly being the selling of support contracts.

The people who are confused are claiming that "Free Software" is zero-cost, and you yourself contradict that belief. "Free Software" is not "free as in beer".

However, just because software is provided free of cost, doesn't mean it can't be supported, or the developers held liable. I don't see really what kind of difference that would make. I mean, other than creating an actual and direct contractual agreement between customer and distributor. If you grab a download for no money, that's obviously different than paying for a subscription, and signing a contract that includes an SLA.

But that doesn't preclude "Free as in Beer" software from having guarantees. Why should it?