My position is questioning the PR work of the free software movement. Or do you think it is in best possible shape?

I don't understand, I don't see the connection between these phrases and PR. If they didn't call it "free software" (which then, it seems to me, forces you to distinguish between the two senses of free), what would you have recommended they call it?

Off the top of my head, I can't think of a better alternative. (Libre is nice, but I think most people would probably get that worse, not better)

Obviously nothing is perfect, but this criticism doesn't make sense to me.

I recommend to call it free software, but just get rid of the disclaimers. Also free as in beer.

(That doesn't mean making beer is free, same as software, so I don't see the need to complicate simple things here)