Critical questions for national bodies considering OOXML/DIS 29500

Bob Sutor has emerged from blogging about Second Life to once again attempt to threaten and intimidate national standards bodies.

I'd like to call your attention to a few of the questions he's asking about:

"Those were the easy and straightforward ones. The following ones are more controversial, but I don't think anyone is naive enough to think they should not be considered.

  • If you voted YES on this, are you willing to stake your professional reputation on that action?
  • If you voted YES on this, can you personally attest to the high quality of the OOXML technology and the standards process it went through?
  • If you voted YES on this, will you publicly explain why and also detail any current or planned commercial interests you have in common with the supporters of OOXML?
  • If you previously did not support OOXML but recently changed your mind, will you publicly and in detail explain why you did this?
  • Do you personally feel that OOXML helps the ISO and IEC "brands" related to quality of technology and process?"

I interpret this as Bob Sutor and IBM trying to intimidate national standard officials. I'm not sure how one would see it any other way than this. So Bob, I just have one or two questions of my own to add to the discussion:

I would have just commented this on your blog, but your "Open Blog" does not allow comments from people who don't agree with you on Open XML.

FYI that I'm not the only one who has a huge problem with this:


Comments (3)

  1. Eric White's Blog says:

    So I’ve been in this job for nearly three months. Seems much longer than that. I’ve been feeling the

  2. Cmdr Flibberty Jibbits says:

    Yeah, I do feel intimidated, hence I ended up using nicknames to avoid further attacks and problems for my customers and employers.

    It has been a very successful intimidation and FUD campaign, just like the good old days when IBM invented the FUD concept.

    I do not blame them, it is a very juicy market, and this is IBM’s chance to get a large piece of that slice from you guys so its understandable that they wont take any prisoners.

    In the end, both Sutor and Weir are merely tools, the policy was probably agreed at higher levels in the org chart, they are merely the faces charged with executing on the strategy.  

    Neither of them is particularly brilliant and as such they have had to resort to moderating and censoring any dissenting opinions and post on their sites.   “Hypocrisy 101” from Jesper also turned out to be a very funny post (see the comments, where Rob makes a cameo appearance only to leave when the questions get difficult, just as predicted by the very post itself).

    Anonymous yours,

    Cmdr Flibberty Jibbits.

  3. Mark Blafkin says:

    It seems that the vast majority of IBM’s finger pointing actually is an attempt to divert attention from its own actions.  As Jan van den Berg former SecGen of Ecma writes in his blog today, IBM is throwing stones from a big glass house.  He catalogues a number of time aggressive and borderline illegal actions by IBM and its employees on the OOXML vote.  Heck, one IBM employee is even advocating a Denial of Service attack on the OOXML community site!

    See here:

Skip to main content