06.01.09
OOXML BRM Convenor (Alex Brown) Joins the Pro-Microsoft Wikipedia Spinners
Nice spin
Summary: New (but familiar) people join Microsoft’s cause against ODF interoperability
LAST NIGHT we saw that Alex Brown, the BRM convenor for OOXML, had joined the anti-ODF cat fight. He has also just become a Wikipedia editor for the article on “OpenDocument”. Any conflict of interests where his relationship with Microsoft comes into play? This morning we found some more mischief in Wikipedia. This carried in in the afternoon (a lot more activity than usual). Here is a removal of Microsoft’s self-referencing smears against ODF and some edits from the vehemently pro-Microsoft “Ghettoblaster“. Joining him again is Rick Jelliffe, to whom Microsoft previously offered money for Wikipedia edits.
“Most people would not suspect a thing because they don’t understand who is involved.”It’s truly fascinating to see how many people or entities serve Microsoft from the outside. Most people would not suspect a thing because they don’t understand who is involved. History matters. Take Black Duck Software for example. Few people know that the genesis of this company is a Microsoft employee. Black Duck Software is currently being used to usher Microsoft into open source software, despite and against the wide opposition to it*. We wrote about this twice before [1, 2] and we also worry somewhat about SourceForge, which has just acquired some former Microsoft employees.
Microsoft’s activity aside, as was pointed out this morning, Ecuador embraces ODF and IBM is happy about it.
What prompted me to realize this just today? I receive the ODF Alliance Newsletter regularly in my inbox. Today, I noticed the following:
(note that while the URL is in Spanish, the translation can be seen here thanks to Google)
ECUADOR CHARTS PATH TO ODF ADOPTION
More ODF in the news:
i. Audit report on Government’s accessibility raises RTF Vs ODF debate
A recent audit of government documents found there is room for improvement in making government documents accessible. The ANAO is suggesting that the government uses RTF or HTML instead of PDF formats to make its documents more accessible online, but Linux users say better still would be to opt for Open Document Format (ODF).
I will be happy to work on all this with my colleagues at the OASIS, and also with you, members of the broader Internet community: Citizens, small and large businesses, government, developers, and others. If you are a voting member of the OASIS consortium, don’t forget to cast your ballot this month, it is important.
It will be interesting to see how Microsoft will try to sneak into this one. The monopolist is more likely to send one of its faithfuls into the opposition’s panel. Just watch how they tried to expel Rob Weir and how they hijack ISO [1, 2]. █
____
* Such opposition is very much justified because Microsoft is suing open source software. It has already sued a European company over software patents and Linux.
Sammy said,
June 8, 2009 at 5:38 am
Ghettoblaster, hAl, and Alex Brown along with probably a dozen other pro Microsoft people have abused wikipedia for a long time. Any article dealing with file formats or microsoft is open to them. They team up di edits within minutes after one another and most likely have dozens of sockpuppets. They scare off all single editors by engaging in edit waring. There needs to be a effort of a lot of foss minded editors on these pages to counteract these people.
Roy Schestowitz Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 5:48 am
Well, Microsoft is paying such people.
Doug Mahugh pays them. They also sell Microsoft software, so it’s business to them.
Doug said,
June 8, 2009 at 9:07 am
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument
‘Newer implementations like OpenOffice.org 3.x Calc use an unknown draft OpenFormula specification’
I don’t understand this bit. If the formula format ‘unknown’, then how could OO3 implement it and what’s stopping anyone from downloading the source or asking on the support forums?
Dave said,
June 8, 2009 at 9:13 am
Regarding Microsofts Wiki sockpuppets. It is patently obvious Wikipedia is being astroturfed a great deal. See this ‘citated’ quote on how Windows NT was never designed for the Intenet. Top class Weazlewords if there ever were ..
“Windows NT .. were not initially designed with Internet security in mind as .. Internet use was less prevalent”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_windows#Security
Roy Schestowitz Reply:
June 8th, 2009 at 9:31 am
Yes, Microsoft’s special ‘friends’ from Waggener Edstrom are there too.