[odf-discuss] Here is Microsoft's spin on the JTC-1 contradictions

[Lars D. Noodén]

On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, Daniel Carrera wrote:
> ... In the specific case of ISO, a system that required every member to 
> review a submission,

Or count abstentions as neither yes nor no.

> or counted abstentions as "no" votes, would likely 
> do more harm than good. Considering that even a fast-track submission is 
> still supposed to get a good review over a 5-month period, the system in 
> place looks appropriate.

Actually, I would expect that abstentions count as abstentions, see choice 
B below.  That would be +/- 0.  Rather than +1 or -1.

A) Abstentions counting as Yes:
 	Y	N	A	Total	%Y	%N
 	5	5	2	12	60%	30%

B) Abstentions counting as neither Yes nor No:

 	Y	N	A	Total	%Y	%N
 	5	5	2	10	50%	50%

C) Abstentions counting as No:

 	Y	N	A	Total	%Y	%N
 	5	5	2	12	30%	60%

>> Take the case of summer holidays, which we've seen in the EC ...
>
> Which shows that even a rigorous system can be abused fairly easily.

Ok.  However, when I first heard of the system, I thought that given the 
context, it is not rigorous and was intended for abuse.

Choice A) above lets an exceedingly small minority slam unpopular things 
through during a diversion.

Choice C) above makes it easier to stonewall.

Anyway, it's not something we can affect, I think.  However, it does need 
to be taken into account when planning how we should approach the next 
steps that ISO's JTC1 will be taking.

-Lars
Lars Noodén
 	Ensure access to your data in the future
 	http://opendocumentfellowship.org/about_us/contribute