Comments on: Slashdot: World’s Third-Largest Population Appeals ISO’s Decision (Updated, Confirmed)

By: Roy Schestowitz

Roy Schestowitz — Fri, 30 May 2008 15:05:10 +0000

That last message seems to be a prelude to an attack on me too, eh?

By: Roy Schestowitz

Roy Schestowitz — Fri, 30 May 2008 15:04:22 +0000

Go ahead and ask him, Dan. Seriously. I’ve read his blog for years and I trust his integrity. He is forced to use Windows at work (KDE themed) for all I can tell.

By: Dan O'Brian

Dan O'Brian — Fri, 30 May 2008 15:04:17 +0000

My point is that if he feels so passionately about how badly these projects are being run/designed/whatever, why doesn’t he actually contribute code?

Answer: he’s an egotistical and hypocritical arse.

By: Dan O'Brian

Dan O'Brian — Fri, 30 May 2008 15:01:50 +0000

If he hates everything Microsoft, then why does he develop for Windows rather than Linux? It’s not like there is any shortage of Linux development jobs these last few years.

By: Roy Schestowitz

Roy Schestowitz — Fri, 30 May 2008 14:57:38 +0000

No, he makes many contributions (suggestions, bug reports, etc). It’s just his style to rant… about everything, not just FOSS. He hates everything Microsoft too…

By: Dan O'Brian

Dan O'Brian — Fri, 30 May 2008 14:54:03 +0000

Regarding your news from Planete Beranger…

Doesn’t anyone else find it strange that a programmer such as this Beranger guy attacks Free Software projects left and right (GNOME, KDE, and XFCE – calling them all crap, insulting the developers by calling them morons, idiots, etc)?

I also find it strange that he has not contributed to ANY Free Software project, yet claims to have been involved with Free Software since 1994, especially since he’s a software developer.

But then you look at his resume… and we find what? “Windows Developer”

Now the picture becomes clear: he insults Free Software projects and developers because Free Software is a threat to his job. He’s a Microsoft shill if there ever was one.

By: Roy Schestowitz

Roy Schestowitz — Fri, 30 May 2008 14:23:20 +0000

I seems so. ‘Penny Lemon’ said this some hours ago, but his comments entered the moderation queue.

By: AlexH

AlexH — Fri, 30 May 2008 14:07:40 +0000

As I understand it, it’s going forward as an appeal and will be treated as such.

By: Roy Schestowitz

Roy Schestowitz — Fri, 30 May 2008 14:05:12 +0000

I’m still watching the GL comments trying to figure out the verdict on Brazil.

By: AlexH

AlexH — Fri, 30 May 2008 14:03:07 +0000

Also, apparently, India filed their appeal fine – it was Brazil who misfiled.

So I take back the comment about it being ad-hoc.

By: Roy Schestowitz

Roy Schestowitz — Fri, 30 May 2008 13:56:40 +0000

Thank you.

By: AlexH

AlexH — Fri, 30 May 2008 13:44:30 +0000

Linky.

By: AlexH

AlexH — Fri, 30 May 2008 13:43:28 +0000

A comment in Bob Sutor’s blog says three appeals: Brazil, SA, and India.

I would have bet on Malaysia personally, and the India appeal sounds a little bit ad-hoc, but there we are.

By: Penny Lemon

Penny Lemon — Fri, 30 May 2008 13:31:36 +0000

http://news.idg.no/cw/art.cfm?id=398AA602-17A4-0F78-3103E0E8BF80DEB5

ISO confirm in the linked article that Brazil, India and South Africa are the only three – all DISAPPROVE votes.

By: Roy Schestowitz

Roy Schestowitz — Fri, 30 May 2008 13:31:20 +0000

They responded vocally to the poor quality of the BRM, IIRC (maybe it’s in GL). Malaysia even issued a press release to criticise it.

By: Penny Lemon

Penny Lemon — Fri, 30 May 2008 13:30:02 +0000

I stand corrected on Brazil.

http://deepakphatak.blogspot.com/ – sheds a little light on India.

By: AlexH

AlexH — Fri, 30 May 2008 13:27:04 +0000

Oh, maybe also let me add Canada to my list of potential appeals.

By: AlexH

AlexH — Fri, 30 May 2008 13:25:33 +0000

Right, I agree, but you seem to have missed my point.

The NBs are basically sovereign. You can’t say to an NB “I don’t think you considered this on technical merits, therefore your vote is invalid” – they can vote how they please, based on whatever they please, including the opinion of the President. ISO is nothing more than global consensus, and ISO obeys its membership not the other way around.

Let me draw an analogy: international whaling conventions. Everyone knows that Japan doesn’t need to kill hundreds of whales for scientific research. But you can’t override Japan’s vote on the convention even though we all know they’re having whale for dinner because they’re a sovereign country.

By: Roy Schestowitz

Roy Schestowitz — Fri, 30 May 2008 13:10:11 +0000

We covered the incidents reported from and about the BRM at the time. It was not only stuffed by Microsoft and its partners (a partial ‘guest list’ had been obtained) but it also had people ignored. The entire thing was a farce. Microsoft hijacked the entire process in so many ways.

Speaking of Sarkozy, he too intervened in what ought to have been a technical decision.

By: AlexH

AlexH — Fri, 30 May 2008 12:58:56 +0000

I’ll try and find a link, but the basic gist of the argument is that the appeals process is basically only ever used for “no doubt” problems. If ISO quashes OOXML based on arguable appeals from no-voters, they’re effectively overriding the majority vote.

The problem with saying the BRM vote was “rigged” is that (unless I misunderstand you) you’re saying that the NBs were stuffed and/or otherwise incented to vote a certain way; appealing that doesn’t fly because NBs are entitled to vote as they please. If France want to vote by Sarkozy fiat, that’s “ok” (obviously it’s not, but you know what I mean).

As for China – I honestly don’t see them appealing. Given what they’re doing with UOF, I don’t seem them caring too much. If they do appeal, I suspect it will be quite weakly worded like the Brazilian letter. Malaysia and India would put together something altogether stronger, and more likely to be taken seriously I think.