Olive CSS: Lisp powered vanilla CSS utility-Class A la Tailwind

The comparison section says the MIT license is not "free" because it's not copyleft. How come is more permissive considered less free?

That's not what it says.

It's a table comparing Olive to Vanilla. In the "feature" column there is a row for "Free Software".

It's not saying one is less free than the other. It's saying what you already know: MIT license is not copyleft.

But it’s saying that tailwind isn’t free software because it is MIT licensed. Why doesn’t MIT license count as free software?

	▲	stvltvs 9 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Because it's not Free Software™. https://www.osweekly.com/free-software-vs-open-source-why-th...
	▲	sublinear 4 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Yeah I'm still not following the loaded premise of this question. It's just a table telling people what the project is about. An MIT-licensed project trying to not scare people away might have the same comparison table in their readme. They'd just flip around the green checkmark and red X.