Readers may care to amuse themselves with this double think: Arnaud Le Hors Clarifiation about ASF and OOXML in which he says
In case anybody misunderstood my blog entry “Let’s be clear: The Apache Software Foundation does NOT support OOXML“, I did not mean to imply that the ASF has any official position one way or another regarding OOXML.
Err, except that the title of the blog was ASF does NOT support OOXML!
even stranger, le Hors is responding to a claim that he made up himself
OK, I’ll admit that nobody has claimed otherwise. Yet. But in these days and age you are never too prudent. It wouldn’t surprise me to see this or other similar fancy claim being published eventually.
So le Hors makes up a claim (that someone is saying ASF officially supports OOXML), then decries it (that ASF does not support it), then is forced to retract the decrial (that ASF has no position), then claims that that he never meant to imply what he had said in plain words in his own headline! O what a tangled web we weave! But quite a funny example of the mentality that seems to have possessed some people: truthy rather than facty.
I only read Arnaud’s blog because I got a mention. He repeats Groklaw’s decade old story about MS secret dirty tricks to maintain control of its proprietary binary standards as de facto standards, and somehow vaguely tieing me into it: daft given that I have been so open and my concern is with helping (force) MS out of its market-dominating proprietary standards. He also mentions Patrick Durusau’s change of heart I see, and repeats the IBM mantra handed down in IBM VP’s Sutor’s Critical questions that dissenters should expect their reputations to be at stake.
As part of IBM’s commitment to intimidation, le Hors reaches a new low, which kind of offsets the chuckles I mentioned at the top. Speaking in the context of me and other experts who dare dissent
the consequences when being caught to have failed to disclose any relevant affiliation could be far greater than they currently are. I’m not excluding judicial prosecution here.
Where are their heads at? People who wonder why I spend so much of time on OOXML issues in this blog, which is time spent at my own cost (and it is a real cost: I could be doing paid work instead of writing this) should recognize that it is largely in response to this kind of bullying and intimidation, that I saw glimpses of early on as the suits started to invade ISO in 2006.
By the way, I see that IBM’s code of ethics includes
4.3.1 Avoiding false and misleading statements about
It is IBM’s policy to sell products and services on their merits. False or
misleading statements and innuendoes about competitors, their
products or their services are improper. Such conduct only invites
disrespect from clients and complaints from competitors
I would be interested to know where IBM stands on an employee just making things up like le Hors does. And I would be interested in how they square the innuendo against dissenters with
4.1 Avoiding misrepresentation
Never make misrepresentations…
My guess is that the response will be Oh this is their private blog, nothing to do with us. But when a VP and a his staff all repeat, encourage or provide forums for the same material, that becomes an infeasible response.