Yes, I reckoned that the use of a nonsensial phrase like “Microsoft’s paid Wikipedia editor” would make it clear that it’s a joke. There is no such role, so it’s almost sarcastic.

From what I was able to gather, your influence in Wikipedia (never mind edits or not) had you compensated. A ‘smoking gun’ is a smoking gun and it matters who was holding it, loading it, preparing it, or whatever. It’s not just the execution.

The consulting contracts you ha[d|ve] with/for Microsoft are nothing too unusual, either. That’s just how Microsoft is providing ‘incentives’ to those who perfume OOXML sufficiently, to the point where they can really believe that OOXML is an ‘open’ format that would be beneficial. Convincing oneself isn’t good enough. And it’s not just OOXML by the way. That’s just one pattern of something broader which deserves to be described as “criminal activity”, a bribe.

Unlike you, I am not a standards or an XML expert. What I do know, however, is that the standardisation process needs to serve those who will be affected by it, not just the money holders. The whole ISO process has been a sham, a shame and a mockery to the industry. Those in the ‘money cycle’ deserve the flak they get. Maybe time will heal the wounds.

Best wishes,

Roy

So please call me something more accurate than “MicroSoft’s paid Wikipedia editor”. I am sure you wouldn’t your readers to be misinformed.

Cheers
Rick Jelliffe