Norwegian committee chairman to ISO: Count our vote as No
March 31, 2008 7:50 pm StandardizationThis was just sent to ISO from the chairman of the Norwegian standards committee responsible for evaluating OOXML:
Formal protest regarding the Norwegian vote on ISO/IEC DIS 29500
I am writing to you in my capacity as Chairman (of 13 years standing) of the Norwegian mirror committee to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC34. I wish to inform you of serious irregularities in connection with the Norwegian vote on ISO/IEC DIS 29500 (Office Open XML) and to lodge a formal protest.
You will have been notified that Norway voted to approve OOXML in this ballot. This decision does not reflect the view of the vast majority of the Norwegian committee, 80% of which was against changing Norway’s vote from No with comments to Yes.
Because of this irregularity, a call has been made for an investigation by the Norwegian Ministry of Trade and Industry with a view to changing the vote.
I hereby request that the Norwegian decision be suspended pending the results of this investigation.
Yours sincerely,
Steve Pepper
Chairman, SN/K185 (ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34 mirror committee)
(sign.)
March 31st, 2008 at 23:40
[…] voted “Yes” on OOXML but on Monday the chairman of the Norwegian technical committee responsible for evaluating OOXML cited irregularities in voting and that Norway’s vote should […]
April 1st, 2008 at 03:50
[…] Posted on Geir Isene’s blog: […]
April 1st, 2008 at 05:53
I just wanted to make sure that you were aware of the follow guidelines written in 1997 by James Plamondon, Technical Evangelist, he lays out an elaborate series of steps to get Microsoft’s platforms accepted as de facto standards. Among the steps listed are working behind the scenes with supposedly independent but actually pliable and supportive analysts and consultants.
————————————-
Our mission is to establish Microsoft’s platforms as the de facto standards throughout the computer industry…. Working behind the scenes to orchestrate “independent” praise of our technology, and damnation of the enemy’s, is a key evangelism function during the Slog. “Independent” analyst’s report should be issued, praising your technology and damning the competitors (or ignoring them). “Independent” consultants should write columns and articles, give conference presentations and moderate stacked panels, all on our behalf (and setting them up as experts in the new technology, available for just $200/hour). “Independent” academic sources should be cultivated and quoted (and research money granted). “Independent” courseware providers should start profiting from their early involvement in our technology. Every possible source of leverage should be sought and turned to our advantage.
I have mentioned before the “stacked panel”. Panel discussions naturally favor alliances of relatively weak partners - our usual opposition. For example, an “unbiased” panel on OLE vs. OpenDoc would contain representatives of the backers of OLE (Microsoft) and the backers of OpenDoc (Apple, IBM, Novell, WordPerfect, OMG, etc.). Thus we find ourselves outnumbered in almost every “naturally occurring” panel debate.
A stacked panel, on the other hand, is like a stacked deck: it is packed with people who, on the face of things, should be neutral, but who are in fact strong supporters of our technology. The key to stacking a panel is being able to choose the moderator. Most conference organizers allow the moderator to select the panel, so if you can pick the moderator, you win. Since you can’t expect representatives of our competitors to speak on your behalf, you have to get the moderator to agree to having only “independent ISVs” on the panel. No one from Microsoft or any other formal backer of the competing technologies would be allowed – just ISVs who have to use this stuff in the “real world.” Sounds marvelously independent doesn’t it? In fact, it allows us to stack the panel with ISVs that back our cause. Thus, the “independent” panel ends up telling the audience that our technology beats the others hands down. Get the press to cover this panel, and you’ve got a major win on your hands.
Finding a moderator is key to setting up a stacked panel. The best sources of pliable moderators are:
— Analysts: Analysts sell out - that’s their business model. But they are very concerned that they never look like they are selling out, so that makes them very prickly to work with.
— Consultants: These guys are your best bets as moderators. Get a well-known consultant on your side early, but don’t let him publish anything blatantly pro-Microsoft. Then, get him to propose himself to the conference organizers as a moderator, whenever a panel opportunity comes up. Since he’s well- known, but apparently independent, he’ll be accepted – one less thing for the constantly-overworked conference organizer to worry about, right?
April 1st, 2008 at 07:48
[…] letter was posted on a blog by Geir Isene, a member of the Norwegian technical committee and the owner of FreeCode […]
April 1st, 2008 at 09:32
[…] Board/Standardization Management Board). Mr. Jachwitz has his share of defending to do against allegations of irregularities in the Norwegian process. He even reported in February to the EU commission that there had been no […]
April 1st, 2008 at 11:27
[…] Noorwegen heeft gevraagd de eigen stem ongeldig te laten verklaren, vanwege de […]
April 1st, 2008 at 11:52
An April Fool’s song about OOXML in Norway:
http://blog.angulosolido.pt/2008/04/norwegian-wood.html
April 1st, 2008 at 13:17
Somewhat off topic:
Seems like $arkozy offered his ass to Billyboy Gates while HP holds the candle fore them.
April 1st, 2008 at 14:02
[…] (Source) […]
April 1st, 2008 at 15:14
[…] text of Pepper’s letter to the ISO was posted by Gere Isene, an IT professional in […]
April 2nd, 2008 at 00:50
Steve Pepper wrote:
“I hereby request that the Norwegian decision be suspended pending the results of this investigation.”
Geir Isene wrote:
“Norwegian committee chairman to ISO: Count our vote as No”
Your headline does not reflect the words from Steve Pepper. Where has he stated that he wants ISO to “count our vote as No”? I do expect a bit more accuracy from members of SN K/185.
April 2nd, 2008 at 04:58
[…] Según el portal de openxml.info en varios países hay varios casos de irregularidades. Uno de los más notables es el caso en el que Noruega cambió su voto de no a sí a pesar de que el 80% del comité estaba en contra de esta decisión. Las reacciones sobre esto no se hicieron esperar y el director del comité técnico ha hecho una protesta pública sobre el tema. […]
April 2nd, 2008 at 07:08
Fredrik:
Please read the rest of the article: “This decision does not reflect the view of the vast majority of the Norwegian committee,…”. Steve is clear that he sees the decision as an irregularity, and that it should reflect the majority in the technical committee.
April 2nd, 2008 at 12:53
I have read the rest of the article and I’m perfectly aware of what Steve Pepper has said in public. He has requested to ISO that the Norwegian decision should be suspended, not that it should be counted as “no”.
Your headline has been quoted a lot of different places but it does still not reflect the words of Steve Pepper. I still believe your headline is inaccurate and I can see no legitimate reason to twist the words of Steve Pepper like you do.
April 2nd, 2008 at 21:05
Fredrik,
Thank you for posting on my blog.
Steve Pepper had no objections to the title of my blog post when he asked me to add the actual PDF for download her. I have had extensive communication with Steve regarding this matter. If he would ask me to change the title, I would be happy to change it.
April 2nd, 2008 at 23:39
[…] Según el portal de openxml.info en varios países hay varios casos de irregularidades. Uno de los más notables es el caso en el que Noruega cambió su voto de no a sí a pesar de que el 80% del comité estaba en contra de esta decisión. Las reacciones sobre esto no se hicieron esperar y el director del comité técnico ha hecho una protesta pública sobre el tema. […]
April 5th, 2008 at 16:18
Its worth it to read the Full text.
May 12th, 2008 at 06:51
[…] do comitê, e outro do presidente do comitê, que estavam na reunião. O presidente do comitê enviou uma carta à ISO, pedindo que o voto da Noruega seja desconsiderado até que o resultado de um inquérito […]
January 13th, 2009 at 17:44
[…] Noorwegen heeft gevraagd de eigen stem ongeldig te laten verklaren, vanwege de […]