Don't knock "Free with provisions" so easily. The license is dual-hatted as a license for the end-user and a license for the software distributor.
To keep freedom for the end user it is required to place restrictions on the distributor. To keep freedom for the distributor/author it is required to place restrictions on the end user.
So "Freedom" is in the eye of the beholder, and people forget that FSF and RMS are on a political, not an engineering mission, which requires licenses like GPL.
If you're just trying to do an open development process because such software "works better" then your view of freedom will never be the same as FSF's, and then licenses like BSD or even MsPL might be just fine.
To keep freedom for the end user it is required to place restrictions on the distributor. To keep freedom for the distributor/author it is required to place restrictions on the end user.
So "Freedom" is in the eye of the beholder, and people forget that FSF and RMS are on a political, not an engineering mission, which requires licenses like GPL.
If you're just trying to do an open development process because such software "works better" then your view of freedom will never be the same as FSF's, and then licenses like BSD or even MsPL might be just fine.