“Dr Hopkirk is a respected advocate for “openness and interoperability of systems, of people, processes and information technologies”. He has in the past, for example, been an invited observer at events such as Open Forum Europe.
However, at the time he was engaged to facilitate the Open Standards roundtable, while we were aware that he represented the National Computing Centre on the Microsoft Interoperability Executive Customer Council (along with 40 other CIOs/CTOs across the public and private sector who participate in a voluntary capacity) he did not declare the fact that he was advising Microsoft directly on the Open Standards consultation.”
That sound’s a lot like Plamondon’s Technological Evangelism:
“A stacked panel, on the other hand, is like a stacked deck: it is packed with people who, on the face of things, should be neutral, but who are in fact strong supporters of our technology. The key to stacking a panel is being able to choose the moderator. Most conference organizers allow the moderator to select the panel, so if you can pick the moderator, you win. Since you can’t expect representatives of our competitors to speak on your behalf, you have to get the moderator to agree to having only “independent ISVs” on the panel. No one from Microsoft or any other formal backer of the competing technologies would be allowed – just ISVs who have to use this stuff in the “real world.” Sounds marvelously independent doesn’t it? In fact, it allows us to stack the panel with ISVs that back our cause. Thus, the “independent” panel ends up telling the audience that our technology beats the others hands down. Get the press to cover this panel, and you’ve got a major win on your hands.”
Yep. I think M$ was caught with a hand in the cookie-jar.
see Open Standards consultation – important update by Digital Engagement on 26/04/2012
The Open Standards Roundtable was an event put on by the Government of the UK to frame it’s policies on IT and the like. FLOSS is under discussion. Having M$ regulating that was like having the fox guarding the chickens.
17493
12777
206
3
2
23943 
11873 
11725 
4643 
4273 
1641 
198 
14 
2 
0 
0 
0 
I think M$ was caught with a hand in the cookie-jar.
I guess that your prejudice against Microsoft blinds you to the larger picture painted by this incident, Mr. Pogson. Consider that the same “community” that holds this fellow as a “respected advocate for ‘openness and interoperability of systems, of people, processes and information technologies’” is willing to viciously turn on him simply because he sold his services to Microsoft.
Do you fail to see the irony? Jamokes like kozmacrae/lpbear speak of cults, but the open source folk who savage their brethren for simply appearing in the “wrong” venue are the true cultists. Even your implication that Microsoft was somehow “caught” suggests that you believe that the good doctor is doing something on the sly.
There was some reference to Tech Rights here in another thread and it would seem that that site grew out of a similar complaint that Novell was sleeping with the enemy in their honest attempt to further the Linux cause.
Such extremism is not going to wind friends and influence people and shows the FOSS world to be a bunch of crazies.
M$’s standard tactic is to subvert people who are otherwise respectable. Clearly, offering Steve Ballmer to chair the event would have failed. They tried to plant a mole, instead.
Do you have such little respect for people’s ideas and morals that you would leap to such a conclusion? This guy is apparently a major voice in the open source “community” in the UK. So Microsoft hires him to be the Devil’s Advocate or maybe just to give them some good advice on how to proceed with the open doc format standard they were pushing. So what?
Do you think that the folk at the conference were so naive as to be misled by what was said? Is the notion of open source that delicate?
Clarence Moon there is a little problem.
Dr Andy Hopkirk
“Associate Consultant at The National Computing Centre (NCC)
Member or other participant in / at Professional Community Activities
Executive Management Team Member & other roles at The National Computing Center (NCC)
Research, Management Support at UK Central Laboratory for the Research Councils (CLRC)”
What one of these is FOSS. Has he ever spoken at a FOSS Conference or even been invited?
So really Dr Andy Hopkirk has never been recognised by the FOSS communities at all. The only place he has any link to Foss in a recognised way is “Microsoft Interoperability Executive Customer Council”.
Remember the main person behind Techrights.org has been asked to speak at FOSSDEM. So is recognised by the community as something to at least hear point of view. Not all speakers at FOSS events are thought of highly. But it at least shows the FOSS world recognises their existence.
Clarence Moon
“This guy is apparently a major voice in the open source “community” in the UK.”
If he was he would have been invited to speak at the FOSS conference in the UK at least. The out rage from large sections of the FOSS world over him is that he is not recognised as FOSS by anyone other than Microsoft. That is the problem. Major voices are asked to speak to at FOSS events. He has not been. Someone here is claiming to be more than what they are. He is not a project lead he is not a person who has been asked to Speak at FOSS conferences. He is not a organiser of FOSS conferences. So where does his title of being a major voice come from.
He is simply a FOSS world nobody being played to be something. So he is not a major voice. He might be a minor voice.
FOSS world status is conformable to some point by how and what they have been asked todo.
Something important he was asked as a observer to “Open Forum Europe” not as a speaker or rep. That was to get feedback from closed source commercials and other entities Open Forum would have to convince. Note observer does not get a right to voice there options at FOSS events. I have been to many in the observer role.
To be correct I have attended more FOSS events than Dr Andy Hopkirk as an observer. If that makes him a major voice than so I am. Yes its that stupid I am not a major voice.
All places he has not been FOSS. That is what when wrong the deck was stacked by people who were not truly FOSS.
Clarence Moon his history don’t back you claim. You are believing his stuffed resume. People with fake resumes need to be held to account.
Well, Mr. Oiaohm, the British government recognizes this guy whereas they do not recognize you at all. Perhaps if you submitted a DNA sample, they could run it against their database!
In any event, no one has made any claim that his work is biased in any way against open source. He merely consulted with Microsoft and thus became a pariah. My comment was in regard to how that demonstrates the fundamental lack of decorum and acceptable social behavior characteristic of the open source zealots.
Clarence Moon
“In any event, no one has made any claim that his work is biased in any way against open source.”
This is not a factor mostly. But he is known to be pro FRAND. No open source community is pro FRAND. So yes he has a bias against FOSS ways.
That is not the factor he has claimed to be a representative. Yet he has nothing to prove that. He was committing fraud. Very serous offence.
“British government recognizes this guy whereas they do not recognize you at all.”
The British Government scraped the meeting and all the results because it became clear that people there were not truthfully representing themselves this include Dr Andy Hopkirk. They are holding a new meeting latter in the month and Dr Andy Hopkirk will not be there same with most of the parties that made up the meeting.
British government recognised not recognizes. Since they no longer recognizes him as a Open Source representative same with many others from that meeting. It has happened before like when the small business representative turned out to be a Microsoft troll owning to a group that had small business in their name but no members that were small business.
Claiming to be something you are not should bring complaints. Claim was that the meeting contained Open Source representatives and it don’t you have a big problem.
“He merely consulted with Microsoft and thus became a pariah.” Due to committing fraud claiming he was something he was not he was a pariah. Now the Microsoft bit was just the FOSS world looking for motivation. That is more than valid when the person is a pariah to work out if they are a puppet working for someone else or not.