The OOXML article explains that Eczema is waiting for the yesmen to hack the EU definition of 'open standard' so that it works nicely for OOXML:
EU definition of an Open Standard
With Ecma International publishing the specification for free and patents made irrevocably available on a royalty-free basis, Office Open XML conforms to all characteristics of the European Union's definition of an open standard.
All characteristics, that is, except for being 'open'. Well, words are made to play with. If language could not evolve, we'd still be speaking UGH, right? On the comments page, regarding NoOOXML.org, an anonymous contributor explains why he is so scared he logs out before making yet one more revert:
"And I have seen on this page before how people are treated by anti-ooxml campaigners so I expecially log-out of my account on wikipedia especially before coming to this page !!! I do not wish to expose myself to the anti-ooxml fanatics. I would suggest everybody that edits in remotly neutral or ooxml favourable edits do this anonomously"
Rick Jelliffe, the guy who accepted Microsoft silver to edit Wikipedia explains his (or his employers?) views on NoOOXML.org:
On the contrary, it is a crackpot site. There are constant claims of bias, with no evidence. For example [3] is entirely scurilous, if not outright racist. It repeats rumours such as [4] then treats them in aggregate as if they have any substance. Rick Jelliffe 07:09, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
69.73.191.92, carefully logged out to avoid the hateful anti-OOXML crowd no doubt seeking to impose free competition and ethics on him, writes from his room in Texas (yes, I can do a reverse IP lookup… does this make me racist?):
The site is a pure slander campaing on OOXML. Allthough I have no doubt that MS tried to influence the voting to approval, on that particular site every country that voted for approval is looked upon as corrupted. Probably they have such a narrow view on things that cannot even imagine that anyone would vote for OOXML out of their own free choice. They suggest that the late additions to sweden is a sign of corruption trying to influence the vote by all entering the committee as late as possible but also call the refusal of the late addition of opponents to the portugal proces as MS corruption. That the two incidents show similar tactics on both parties seems to completly escape their view. 69.73.191.92 11:30, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Slander… that's a hangin' offense, sheriff! Send the posse! Seriously, yes, we suggest that Sweden and Portugal were… how can we put this politely… corruption. Redmond, a piece of advice: if you can't take the heat, don't cheat.
The nooxml site is purely about votes and about sending letter to ISO member to make them change their vote. It relies on other sites to get its issues from and only bring new when it is about somebody voting no or kicing ar riot when someone doesn't. The sites on which most of its issues are based are already in the article and the protest campaing does not belong in wikipedia. I just noticed that the president of FFII actually made an article his own website. How pathetic are these people for getting some extra hits and gathering more petition votes ??? hAl 21:56, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
To which WLD replied:
That is a severe mischaracterisation of the NoOOXML site and does not belong in a reasoned debate.WLDtalk|edits 23:06, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia is great fun. The yesmen seriously need to slow down on the coffee, and install a decent spelchkr. I mean, seriously, hAl, you've been hacking pro-Microsoft text on Wikipedia for ages. Als je toch Engels gaat schrijven, gebruik dan een woordenboek.
Read the talk page on OOXML and laugh.
