07.01.09
Rob Weir Complains About Microsoft’s Manipulation of Wikipedia
Summary: Microsoft carries on smearing ODF in public while pretending to support it
Microsoft is still changing ODF’s history and daemonising ODF using Wikipedia. We wrote about that in:
- Microsoft Starts Attacking the ODF Alliance, Sends Paid Wikipedia Editors to ODF Article (Updated)
- OOXML BRM Convenor (Alex Brown) Joins the Pro-Microsoft Wikipedia Spinners
- Microsoft Folks Rewrite ODF’s History and Build Anti-ODF Social Network
- Fraunhofer Again Lobbies for Microsoft Lock-in
- Is Microsoft’s AstroTurf Against ODF Still On?
- Microsoft Windows Discriminates Against ODF, FSF Denounces Microsoft for ODF Abuse
- Microsoft Agents from Waggener Edstrom Airbrush Wikipedia, Glorify Paymaster
- Microsoft Seeks Experts to Corrupt Wikipedia Information on Open XML
Rob Weir has already complained about this. It is part of Microsoft’s ongoing attack on ODF [1, 2] — an attack which it is defending by buying journalists lunch (now confirmed to us by the journalist) so that is can carry on breaking ODF interoperability [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7] without public scrutiny.
Weir has just published another rant about Wikipedia, so obviously he keeps track of the continued manipulation by Microsoft — one that we too are seeing because all edits are visible.
I have a mental model of how Wikipedia works and behaves. This may not reflect reality, but it is how I, as an end-user, expect Wikipedia to behave. I think these are reasonable expectations regarding things like standards of proof and balance and that if the real Wikipedia differs substantially from these expectations, then we have a problem.
[...]
Does anyone know whether the above statements have any basis in the aspirations or actual practice of Wikipedia editors and admins? Sadly, my recent reading of some articles suggests that these reasonable expectations are routinely flouted and bear little resemblance to reality.
It’s obvious what Microsoft must be thinking.
“All those haters…”
But to characterise opposition as “anti-Microsoft” is like describing the police as “anti-criminals” and thus “irrational haters”. Microsoft’s behaviour speaks for itself. █
“Their documents display a clear intent to monopolize, to prevent any competition from springing up. And they have used a variety of restrictive practices to prevent that kind of competition.”
–Judge Robert Bork, former US Supreme Court nominee (on Microsoft)
Yuhong Bao said,
July 2, 2009 at 3:26 am
“But to characterise opposition as “anti-Microsoft” is like describing the police as “anti-criminals” and thus “irrational haters”.”
For example, MinceR is anti-Apple, but he is not an “irrational hater”. Apple is not perfect and do have real issues.