[News] Microsoft OOXML: Fail

On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:56:14 +0000, Mark Kent wrote:

> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups.RemoveThis@schestowitz.com> espoused:
>> ____/ Mark Kent on Monday 10 March 2008 15:19 : \____
>>
>>> whether there've been any more "Swedens" with real cash changing hands,
>>> or whether we've had delegates turn up to these meetings who've never
>>> been before.
>>
>> They are just sitwarmers. Nothing to see here... they defend themselves (their
>> bosses) while purporting to be representative of a nation. Conflict of
>> interests is what they call it...
>>
>> It doesn't matter how many smileys Jesper may post here. He is being
>> apologetic, having done the damage.
>>
>
> I share your suspicion. There is no excuse for trying to force this
> work through, and there has been no effort to do it properly.

Translation: Our side is losing and we don't like it.

--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:05:21 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:

> ____/ Mark Kent on Tuesday 11 March 2008 08:56 : \____
>
>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups.TakeThisOut@schestowitz.com> espoused:
>>> ____/ Mark Kent on Monday 10 March 2008 15:19 : \____
>>>
>>>> whether there've been any more "Swedens" with real cash changing hands,
>>>> or whether we've had delegates turn up to these meetings who've never
>>>> been before.
>>>
>>> They are just sitwarmers. Nothing to see here... they defend themselves
> ^seat
>>> (their bosses) while purporting to be representative of a nation. Conflict
>>> of interests is what they call it...
>>>
>>> It doesn't matter how many smileys Jesper may post here. He is being
>>> apologetic, having done the damage.
>>>
>>
>> I share your suspicion. There is no excuse for trying to force this
>> work through, and there has been no effort to do it properly.
>
> I am amazed to find Microsoft partners in a Linux newsgroup. They don't just
> defend themselves. They defend OOXML now. Next step slamming the GPL?
> Attacking advocates? How low has Microsoft sunk? I mean, I know the company
> approaches debt and tries to hide this, but it's no reason or excuse to harass
> its #1 competition.

This *isn't* a Linux group.
It's a Microsoft hate group.


--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

Moshe Goldfarb wrote:

> On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:05:21 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> ____/ Mark Kent on Tuesday 11 March 2008 08:56 : \____
>>
>>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups.RemoveThis@schestowitz.com> espoused:
>>>> ____/ Mark Kent on Monday 10 March 2008 15:19 : \____
>>>>
>>>>> whether there've been any more "Swedens" with real cash changing
>>>>> hands, or whether we've had delegates turn up to these meetings who've
>>>>> never been before.
>>>>
>>>> They are just sitwarmers. Nothing to see here... they defend themselves
>> ^seat
>>>> (their bosses) while purporting to be representative of a nation.
>>>> Conflict of interests is what they call it...
>>>>
>>>> It doesn't matter how many smileys Jesper may post here. He is being
>>>> apologetic, having done the damage.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I share your suspicion. There is no excuse for trying to force this
>>> work through, and there has been no effort to do it properly.
>>
>> I am amazed to find Microsoft partners in a Linux newsgroup. They don't
>> just defend themselves. They defend OOXML now. Next step slamming the
>> GPL? Attacking advocates? How low has Microsoft sunk? I mean, I know the
>> company approaches debt and tries to hide this, but it's no reason or
>> excuse to harass its #1 competition.
>
> This *isn't* a Linux group.
> It's a Microsoft hate group.
>
>
Ca...Ching!
--
Micros~1 Accounting Department - 1 Payment Made:
Our records indicate that you've carried out your assigned mission. Your
account has been credited. Please use MS Money to view your current
balance.

News Alert: Area man finally discovers blogging...
http://tinyurl.com/2qeo3z

William Poaster <wp.RemoveThis@leafnode.amd64.eu> wrote in
news:qo7ia5-c6b.ln1@leafnode.archimedes.eu:

> Jesper Lund Stocholm wrote:

> Oh, you mean like Micro$oft did with their "Get the Facts"
> campaign...yeah, that was factually correct, wasn't it.
> And like Micro$oft's ads, that were pulled by the UK Advertising
> Standards Authority:
> http://www.cxolinux.com/linux/jsp/article.jsp?article_id=1393&cat_id=12
> 02 And also by the South African Advertising Standards Authority:
> http://www.itweb.co.za/sections/business/2003/0303201315.asp?S=Software
> &A=SFT&O=FPMS

So you are saying that the information I have provided is false?

> Good. Now push off.

Strange ... )

--
Jesper Lund Stocholm
http://idippedut.dk

On 11 Mar 2008 13:52:21 GMT, Jesper Lund Stocholm wrote:

> William Poaster <wp.DeleteThis@leafnode.amd64.eu> wrote in
> news:qo7ia5-c6b.ln1@leafnode.archimedes.eu:
>
>> Jesper Lund Stocholm wrote:
>
>> Oh, you mean like Micro$oft did with their "Get the Facts"
>> campaign...yeah, that was factually correct, wasn't it.
>> And like Micro$oft's ads, that were pulled by the UK Advertising
>> Standards Authority:
>> http://www.cxolinux.com/linux/jsp/article.jsp?article_id=1393&cat_id=12
>> 02 And also by the South African Advertising Standards Authority:
>> http://www.itweb.co.za/sections/business/2003/0303201315.asp?S=Software
>> &A=SFT&O=FPMS
>
> So you are saying that the information I have provided is false?
>
>> Good. Now push off.
>
> Strange ... )

Welcome to comp.os.linux.advocacy, the land of the paranoid.

I warned you from your very first post that the so called Linux advocates
in this group have for the most part collectively slipped a cog.

I'm pretty certain you have now seen that for yourself.

--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

Jesper Lund Stocholm <jls2008.TakeThisOut@lundstocholm.invalid> writes:

> William Poaster <wp.TakeThisOut@leafnode.amd64.eu> wrote in
> news:qo7ia5-c6b.ln1@leafnode.archimedes.eu:
>
>> Jesper Lund Stocholm wrote:
>
>> Oh, you mean like Micro$oft did with their "Get the Facts"
>> campaign...yeah, that was factually correct, wasn't it.
>> And like Micro$oft's ads, that were pulled by the UK Advertising
>> Standards Authority:
>> http://www.cxolinux.com/linux/jsp/article.jsp?article_id=1393&cat_id=12
>> 02 And also by the South African Advertising Standards Authority:
>> http://www.itweb.co.za/sections/business/2003/0303201315.asp?S=Software
>> &A=SFT&O=FPMS
>
> So you are saying that the information I have provided is false?
>
>> Good. Now push off.
>
> Strange ... )

Meet Willy "Filters" Poaster. A more useless individual you would not
find. He claims to have some magical powers in determining "nyms" from
non existent headers. Everyone laughs at him.

It has been claimed that he is the most boring poster ever to post to
Usenet. I see nothing to refute that claim.

Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.straw.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> writes:

> On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:56:14 +0000, Mark Kent wrote:
>
>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups.TakeThisOut@schestowitz.com> espoused:
>>> ____/ Mark Kent on Monday 10 March 2008 15:19 : \____
>>>
>>>> whether there've been any more "Swedens" with real cash changing hands,
>>>> or whether we've had delegates turn up to these meetings who've never
>>>> been before.
>>>
>>> They are just sitwarmers. Nothing to see here... they defend themselves (their
>>> bosses) while purporting to be representative of a nation. Conflict of
>>> interests is what they call it...
>>>
>>> It doesn't matter how many smileys Jesper may post here. He is being
>>> apologetic, having done the damage.
>>>
>>
>> I share your suspicion. There is no excuse for trying to force this
>> work through, and there has been no effort to do it properly.
>
> Translation: Our side is losing and we don't like it.

Just listen to those two nutcases!

They know nothing whatsoever about ODF or OOXML and just waffle on like
a couple of grannies at a knitting convention.

On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 17:17:58 +0100, Hadron wrote:

> Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.straw DeleteThis @gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:56:14 +0000, Mark Kent wrote:
>>
>>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups DeleteThis @schestowitz.com> espoused:
>>>> ____/ Mark Kent on Monday 10 March 2008 15:19 : \____
>>>>
>>>>> whether there've been any more "Swedens" with real cash changing hands,
>>>>> or whether we've had delegates turn up to these meetings who've never
>>>>> been before.
>>>>
>>>> They are just sitwarmers. Nothing to see here... they defend themselves (their
>>>> bosses) while purporting to be representative of a nation. Conflict of
>>>> interests is what they call it...
>>>>
>>>> It doesn't matter how many smileys Jesper may post here. He is being
>>>> apologetic, having done the damage.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I share your suspicion. There is no excuse for trying to force this
>>> work through, and there has been no effort to do it properly.
>>
>> Translation: Our side is losing and we don't like it.
>
> Just listen to those two nutcases!
>
> They know nothing whatsoever about ODF or OOXML and just waffle on like
> a couple of grannies at a knitting convention.

It's truly amazing!

Here they have a golden opportunity to pick the brain of a person WHO WAS
ACTUALLY A DECISION MAKER AT THE CONFERENCE, and all they can do is turn up
the gain on their tinfoil hats.

Roy's lame podcast on OOXML was funny, but this is even more hysterical.

It just goes to prove how lame Roy Schestowitz, Mark Kent etc really are.
They can't discuss a point.
All they can do is conjure up conspiracy theories and hurl insults at
people who are a hell of a lot more intelligent than they ever will be.


--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

____/ William Poaster on Tuesday 11 March 2008 11:41 : \____

> Jesper Lund Stocholm wrote:
>
>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups DeleteThis @schestowitz.com> wrote in
>> news:6414322.6q2ei7hhhM@schestowitz.com:
>>
>>> I am amazed to find Microsoft partners in a Linux newsgroup. They
>>> don't just defend themselves. They defend OOXML now. Next step
>>> slamming the GPL? Attacking advocates? How low has Microsoft sunk? I
>>> mean, I know the company approaches debt and tries to hide this, but
>>> it's no reason or excuse to harass its #1 competition.
>>
>> Well, Roy, the reason for my starting to post here was that I saw factually
>> wrong information being spread here amongst others by you.
>
>> My wish was merely to provide the correct information to you guys. You might
>> not like me correcting you, but my aim was simply to provide the correct
>> information
>> ... which I have done.
>
> Oh, you mean like Micro$oft did with their "Get the Facts" campaign...yeah,
> that was factually correct, wasn't it.
> And like Micro$oft's ads, that were pulled by the UK Advertising Standards
> Authority:
> http://www.cxolinux.com/linux/jsp/article.jsp?article_id=1393&cat_id=1202
> And also by the South African Advertising Standards Authority:
>
http://www.itweb.co.za/sections/business/2003/0303201315.asp?S=Softwar...=SFT&O=
>
>> And no - I am not defending OOXML ... there is really no point in doing it
>> in here.
>
> Good. Now push off.

Microsoft likes to call it 'balance'. It believes its side is the truth and it
goes as far as bribing people to edit Wikipedia and project it. I don't accept
Jesper's excuse It's a waste of time. He's a Microsoft 'vote stacker'.

--
~~ Best of wishes

Roy S. Schestowitz | Warning 0x12C: ispell feels tired
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine

Jesper Lund Stocholm <jls2008.DeleteThis@lundstocholm.invalid> espoused:
> William Poaster <wp.DeleteThis@leafnode.amd64.eu> wrote in
> news:qo7ia5-c6b.ln1@leafnode.archimedes.eu:
>
>> Jesper Lund Stocholm wrote:
>
>> Oh, you mean like Micro$oft did with their "Get the Facts"
>> campaign...yeah, that was factually correct, wasn't it.
>> And like Micro$oft's ads, that were pulled by the UK Advertising
>> Standards Authority:
>> http://www.cxolinux.com/linux/jsp/article.jsp?article_id=1393&cat_id=12
>> 02 And also by the South African Advertising Standards Authority:
>> http://www.itweb.co.za/sections/business/2003/0303201315.asp?S=Software
>> &A=SFT&O=FPMS
>
> So you are saying that the information I have provided is false?

You have spun well for your paymasters, however, nobody, anywhere, is
remotely convinced that you are acting for anything other than the
interests of Microsoft in your efforts to corrupt ISO, to push a
standard through on fast-track which is clearly not only widely
unsupported but so immature as to be next to worthless.

We *know* that Microsoft could easily implement ODF it it wanted.
We *know* that Microsoft will "innovate" beyond OOXML anyway.
We *know* that OOXML in its present form is utterly incomplete and
unusable.


>
>> Good. Now push off.
>
> Strange ... )
>

Not really, you are here pushing the agenda of Microsoft. Just like
you've been doing in ISO.

--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
| My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |

Jesper Lund Stocholm <jls2008 RemoveThis @lundstocholm.invalid> espoused:
> Mark Kent <mark.kent RemoveThis @demon.co.uk> wrote in
> news:07uha5-a7a.ln1@ellandroad.demon.co.uk:
>
>> Jesper Lund Stocholm <jls2008 RemoveThis @lundstocholm.invalid> espoused:
>>> Mark Kent <mark.kent RemoveThis @demon.co.uk> wrote in
>>>
>>> Well, I cannot answer this. Do note that the cameras are present "on
>>> the floor" where the final debate is taken place in e.g. UN. There is
>>> no camera in the rooms adjecent to the "floor" where the real
>>> negociations take place. In the BRM, the floor was where stuff was
>>> negociated.
>>
>> Quite, so no viable reason for this ban, then, other than people
>> trying to hide themselves.
>
> Heah, well - I am not one of those. I was just trying to provide som
> reasoning for people not wanting their pictures taken.

Why? The issue remains suspicious to me. If /individuals/ don't want
their picture taking, that's fine, but where in the rules does the
chairman have the right to make such a determination? It seems to me
that he's massively overstepped his remit.

>
>> I'm an "old standards person" and we used to take photos, there was
>> never a problem, and we were not embarrassed about what we were doing.
>> No, I believe that some consciences are stirring.
>
> Do note that I myself have absolutely no problem with cameras being in
> the room if they should have chosen so ... I think I have done what I can
> to make it impossible to hide the fact that I was at the BRM.

see my remark above.

>
>)
>
>>> Yes - but a camera in the room does squat to change this ... there
>>> will always be corridor-talk - regardless of a camera in the room.
>>>
>> No, but the camera *can* show who was doing it, because it shows who
>> was present, even if the meeting notes make no particular reference to
>> any part they took.
>
> But there is already a list of delegates to show who was there. Unless
> you want cameras in the hallways as well, it won't do you any good.

A list of delegates is a dry, non-visual thing, newspapers and the press
are not overly interested in such things. Pictures, however, make it
real, make the people real. Not having pictures, however, makes it much
easier for people to hide. The chairman should not be helping this.

>
>> I was a rapporteur and delegate for many years, I know how this stuff
>> works.
>
> OK
>
> Also: I mentioned our conversation to the HoD of Denmark at the meeting
> and she said that not having cameras in the room is more or less standard
> ISO procedure ... it is nothing specific to the BRM. There were also no
> cameras in the room at the JTC1/SC34-plenary I attended in Kyoto.
>

There is no such thing as "more or less procedure". There is no rule
which I'm aware of which allows a chairman to require no use of cameras.

--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
| My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 07:27:24 +0000,
Mark Kent <mark.kent DeleteThis @demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Jesper Lund Stocholm <jls2008 DeleteThis @lundstocholm.invalid> espoused:
>> William Poaster <wp DeleteThis @leafnode.amd64.eu> wrote in
>> news:qo7ia5-c6b.ln1@leafnode.archimedes.eu:
>>
>>> Jesper Lund Stocholm wrote:
>>
>>> Oh, you mean like Micro$oft did with their "Get the Facts"
>>> campaign...yeah, that was factually correct, wasn't it.
>>> And like Micro$oft's ads, that were pulled by the UK Advertising
>>> Standards Authority:
>>> http://www.cxolinux.com/linux/jsp/article.jsp?article_id=1393&cat_id=12
>>> 02 And also by the South African Advertising Standards Authority:
>>> http://www.itweb.co.za/sections/business/2003/0303201315.asp?S=Software
>>> &A=SFT&O=FPMS
>>
>> So you are saying that the information I have provided is false?
>
> You have spun well for your paymasters, however, nobody, anywhere, is
> remotely convinced that you are acting for anything other than the
> interests of Microsoft in your efforts to corrupt ISO, to push a
> standard through on fast-track which is clearly not only widely
> unsupported but so immature as to be next to worthless.
>

Mark, Jesper Lund Stocholm has been reasonable and polite. Perhaps you
could try responding in kind.


> We *know* that Microsoft could easily implement ODF it it wanted.
> We *know* that Microsoft will "innovate" beyond OOXML anyway.
> We *know* that OOXML in its present form is utterly incomplete and
> unusable.
>
>

I don't trust MS, plain and simple. I don't think most of the people
there are evil in the normal sense. But the company sure acts that way.
Madness of crowds to a certain aspect.





>>
>>> Good. Now push off.
>>
>> Strange ... )
>>
>
> Not really, you are here pushing the agenda of Microsoft. Just like
> you've been doing in ISO.
>

Seems fairly evenly balanced to me. ODF isn't perfect, and OOXML isn't
evil incarnate.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFH2AMSd90bcYOAWPYRAs6gAJ9Bnl2TgPL5Wdm2WUQHZBAkApZmFACgmZlg
kjYHyHbcEAksjj91F7FFuow=
=jhuh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
"Life is a sexually transmitted disease
with a 100% mortality rate."

Mark Kent wrote:

> Jesper Lund Stocholm <jls2008.RemoveThis@lundstocholm.invalid> espoused:
>> William Poaster <wp.RemoveThis@leafnode.amd64.eu> wrote in
>> news:qo7ia5-c6b.ln1@leafnode.archimedes.eu:
>>
>>> Jesper Lund Stocholm wrote:
>>
>>> Oh, you mean like Micro$oft did with their "Get the Facts"
>>> campaign...yeah, that was factually correct, wasn't it.
>>> And like Micro$oft's ads, that were pulled by the UK Advertising
>>> Standards Authority:
>>> http://www.cxolinux.com/linux/jsp/article.jsp?article_id=1393&cat_id=12
>>> 02 And also by the South African Advertising Standards Authority:
>>> http://www.itweb.co.za/sections/business/2003/0303201315.asp?S=Software
>>> &A=SFT&O=FPMS
>>
>> So you are saying that the information I have provided is false?
>
> You have spun well for your paymasters, however, nobody, anywhere, is
> remotely convinced that you are acting for anything other than the
> interests of Microsoft in your efforts to corrupt ISO, to push a
> standard through on fast-track which is clearly not only widely
> unsupported but so immature as to be next to worthless.
>
> We *know* that Microsoft could easily implement ODF it it wanted.
> We *know* that Microsoft will "innovate" beyond OOXML anyway.
> We *know* that OOXML in its present form is utterly incomplete and
> unusable.
>
>
>>
>>> Good. Now push off.
>>
>> Strange ... )
>>
>
> Not really, you are here pushing the agenda of Microsoft. Just like
> you've been doing in ISO.

Quite.

--
Free-BSD 7.0, PC-BSD 1.4
Linux systems: PCLOS 2007,Fedora 8, Kubuntu 7.10.
Testing: Mandrake One 2008.1 RC1
-- On 64bit systems --