How to Royally Annoy National Bodies

Guide to future monopolists on how to alienate yourself from National Bodies:

1. Waste NBs time in reviewing monstrous draft specifications
2. Claim that these specs can do everything for anyone by standardising marketing material
3. If you don't get your way at a certain level, lobby the superior above. Dont stop! Go all the way to the head of the nation if you think you can!
4. Leak press stories to journalists to pressure Ministries to make a decision. Quick!
5. Try to shut down TCs if actual technical work is done revealing issues with your plan
6. Question Question Question everything (process, fairness, the system, members) when things dont go your way
7. Otherwise create another TC with friendly experts
8. If the NB allows new members just by paying membership fees, encourage your business partners to join with marketing funds. Stack-stack-stack it high!
9. Stalk decision makers, even if it means traveling around the globe with them
10. Refuse changes in the spec especially if it breaks your product which you released prior
11. Have private interviews with TC members in the guise of funding for their new projects/research grants/interoperability initiatives and conveniently talk about their position on your spec.
12. Get your Business Partners to write in form letters. Some don't even bother to change the templates
13. Attend TC meetings uninvited by fabricating business cards
14. Send Lawyers in to Technical Committee meetings who prefer not to engage in "high-school" debates
15. Make rude and inaccurate statements against TC members in public

I'm sure there are more tactics which monopolists could use, but these are just a few which Ive heard about or witnessed over the past year. Other National Bodies would have more colourful stories to tell, and I guess the truth will come out eventually.

===

On a separate and completely unrelated note, the Chair for the Malaysian SIRIM TC4 has responded to Doug Mahugh (Microsoft USA employee) on Doug's outburst against fellow TC4 members and the Chair himself. Now Prof Zaki is a quiet man of a few words, but when you get on his wrong side, well ...

Dear Doug,

I am surprised and appalled to read your blog and its many inaccuracies.

For the record, I could not start the meeting on time at 9:00 because the Secretariat from SIRIM did not come in and not because we were waiting for YK or Detesh. I flew in from Johor Baharu that morning at 7:00 am and was in the room before 8:30 am.

The reason why the Secretary from SIRIM was delayed because members of TC4 have complained that we have allowed a vendor in the meeting and of course demanded equal rights to attend too. SIRIM has to sort the matter to ensure our meeting will be valid.

As your friend Yuk Wai from IASA would have briefed you, Malaysia's TC4 was suspended and reorganized by ISC G last year because of the unfortunate bickering from certain members who were vendor biased and due to many other related incidents. Many of us were very upset and so did not want the matter to happen again. This is also the first time TC matters were raised in the Malaysian Cabinet and is a concern of the Minister of Science, Technology and Innovation as well as the Chief Secretary.

Yes, at that time we allowed member organizations to bring other staff because it was a technical meeting and we welcomed technical contributions. We even had at one meeting too many representatives from Microsoft when the normal rep himself was on sick leave. Unfortunately they did not do their homework and lobbied TC4 on business basis which was more suitable for ISC G. When members queried the Microsoft rep on technical matters he could not answer because he was not a technical person and the other reps could not answer either.

So that we do not have similar problems and complications in the future, ISC G revamped our committee into two layers and decided I, as an academic and without any vendor interest, still chair TC4. I still hold to the principle of neutrality, openness and fairness. I challenge you to find me otherwise. I am a senior professor and administrator from a very reputable public university in Malaysia and I hold our reputation seriously and dearly.

Last Friday meeting was for full members only and should be void from any vendor bias. IASA has been absent from previous meetings and that was the first meeting for them since last year so Yuk Wai might not know the TC4 committee governance has changed and we did not invite co-opted members. So it was to my surprise too to see you in the room.

However, SIRIM gave me as chair, the prerogative to decide to allow observers for the meeting after consulting the members present. That was the reason to ask you and the other new faces to leave the room temporarily.

For your information, after some deliberation the members voted and it was a tie. I gave the tie breaker to allow observers in. Unfortunately you have already left. We had a good meeting with the other observers inside. Everyone including Yuk Wai from IASA was given a chance to speak. We left with a good note.

Back to your issue. If you remember correctly, when you took your bag & computer and wanted to leave in haste to catch your flight, you said, "it was best I leave". Never did I bar you from attending our meeting. It was a matter of patience and I was confident our members would agree to have observers and we were very OPEN in our deliberation. In fact, I smiled at you and sincerely asked whether you will be coming to our next meeting since you had to leave. But you said. "we will see."

If you are truly representing IASA Malaysia and has been appointed as an alternate member, then I expect to see you at our next meeting which is scheduled every month to discuss many matters which were suspended because of the incident last year. If your attendance last Friday was a one timer, then it would put IASA in a negative view in the eyes of TC4 and ISC G members. So please move to Malaysia from the US and have a permanent address here.

For your information, our TC4 meetings have always been very cordial and I have always allow members to speak their mind, of course with a certain decorum. So that is why we took some time to get you and the others to leave us to deliberate the issue of observers because I allow members to question the action.

Ms. Tan from MAMPU and other members have the right to speak and I am confident and capable of answering and chairing the meeting. You can ask Yuk Wai, I normally allow other members to speak too. This is Malaysian diplomacy in action and this is how we conduct our meeting. Too bad you are not used to this openness and style.

I sincerely hope this matter be put to rest and all members uphold their dignity and decorum in future meetings.

Thank You and see you at our next meeting.

Prof. Dr. Ahmad Zaki Abu Bakar
Chairman
National Standards Committee on E-Commerce, SIRIM (TC4)
[email redacted]

Prof Zaki actually emailed this response to our internal TC4 maillist. He said that he has responded it to Doug's blog post and its awaiting moderation clearance. I'm not sure which blog post it will appear in, because Doug is busy packing and moving house ... maybe to KL, Malaysia his new permanent home?

Tapi,

"kita tak mahu Tak Mahu. Kitapun terasa malu. Tapi Tak Mahu tak malu ..."

yk.

Comments

[Max Stirner]

I have left the following comment on the new IASA VP's blog page - I thought you may also be interested in some outside opinion-

"I was rather impressed with the Malaysian technical procedures. It appears that the Malaysian committee has devised regulations on its own accord to limit corrupting influences from parties with a vested interest. This seems to have been due to critical reflection on part of the relevant governmental authorities.

This level of reflection has not been attained in the US. Richard@xinnin above [on the comments page of Dough's blog] is writing as both a technical committee member and an MS partner. And he got to vote in that NB. The body is thus corrupted by vested interests. Perhaps academics are a more sensible source of "neutral" technical advice than vendors of mediocre technology?

This business card scam ought to be a source of deep embarrassment to MSFT. On the contrary, the fact that this standard scam, which is apparently totally acceptable in the U.S., did not wash, seems to be a source of suprise rather than regret!

I rather enjoyed this whole ooxml process. In the past, Western corporations could just go around corrupting national governments, swapping business cards, hiring experts, stacking boards etc. These days, we get the benefit of transparency. And the sources of corruption are exposed to ridicule."

Best wishes,

Max Stirner

[Steven]

As a developer using MS products I have let it be known at work that I would prefer to work with other vendors products. I feel as though my products are supporting MS and with this episode plus many of their other actions over the last few years (not to mention constantly working around their bugs) it is time to vote with my feet.

The internet is a wonderful thing, it allows us to get multiple points of view to make informed decisions and despite Microsoft's apparent view, marketing cannot fix technical issues.

The more they tighten their grip the more that will slip through their fingers.

Steven.

[Roy Schestowitz]

Bravo, yk. Someone had to say this out loud.