I have a copy of the magazine in the editorial they explain why they accepted adv by Microsoft.

Oops.... when I was young I used to read it all, but now I'm no more :(

In the article of Sam Ockman, I've seen an explanation to why HE supported the term Open Source against Free software when it was created rather then predication to the use of the term Open Source against Free Software.

Hmm... didn't consider this option. I may make sense and turn the article into a positive move, but it isn't explicit as it should be. Actually, the author is not known enough to justify an article that clarifies to the public his position back then. While I hope your interpretation is right, unfortunately it don't think that's the message people get.

On the other hand, Sam Ockman also writes "Ultimately, it is the freedom of open source software that provides its most powerful advantages. If we could have designed a name that expressed a clear and accurate message of freedom, we certainly would have." -- still, I think "libre" works well and "open source" is by design on a different level.

/alessandro, who should learn to be more careful in judging