On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 12:06:57 +0100, Hadron wrote:
> Doug Mentohl <doug_mentohl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> "We have discovered that Matthew Holloway was badly slurred by a
>> Microsoft employee in an email to one of the bodies advising an
>> overseas standards NB. It is worth noting that our own national body,
>> Standards New Zealand (SNZ), took the claims so seriously that they
>> responded to parties who received this email"
>>
>> 'Your email suggests that Matthew is "far from objective" that his
>> goal "has always been to de-rail OOXML rather than making it a better
>> specification" and that this "has clouded a lot of his thinking"'
>>
>> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080318151252279
>
> First time I ever took the time to read that site in more detail.
>
> Wow. What a bunch of paranoid nut jobs!
>
> It was a single MS employee and all he did was question this guys
> objectivity.
>
> Like that has never happened in standard adoption procedures
> before. Anyway who needs standards?
>
> According to COLA when it comes down to UI consistency, it's all about
> "choice".
Maybe it's Roy Schestowitz under one of his nyms?
The problem with Linuc advocacy is you are either with them or against
them.
IOW you have to swallow the koolaid completely and agree with everything
they stand for or they don't want you.
--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
|
|
