Slashdot Mirror


OOXML Critic Fired From Finnish Standards Board

Shirke writes "A Finnish computer magazine reports that Finnish Standards Association has fired Mr. Lassi Nirhamo (article in Finnish). Some excerpts: Mr. Nirhamo was chairing the OOXML standard proposal meeting. During the meeting Mr. Nirhamo asked other board members to be excused of his duties and voice his opinion as a private citizen. After this was granted he criticized the standard proposal and resumed his duties as chairman. Mr. Nirhamo has now been let go due to a 'lack of trust.' Independent observers have assessed his chairmanship as 'excellent' and 'one of a kind.' The Association is accepting applications for the position. Anyone interested?"

3 of 200 comments (clear)

  1. Re:So... by Max+Littlemore · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Look at it this way - if I asked my company for permission to speak candidly, and it was granted, and then I told them that I'd been stealing stuff from them, or selling secrets to the competition, I'd be fired. Not because I spoke candidly, but because of what I said.

    No you wouldn't, you'd be fired for what you did. Big difference there.

    If you asked to speak candidly at a meeting, were given permission and you stood up and said "Our products suck, no one I know likes them and we're a laughing stock", a good company would maybe want to hear more details as part of an improvement process.

    Then again, maybe if you work for a company that's a laughing stock, inability to take criticism is probably a respect aspect of the corporate culture and being fired might look good on the CV.

    --
    I don't therefore I'm not.
  2. Re:So... by CortoMaltese · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Look at it this way: It's his job to say the things he said, right? He chose to say them off the record so that instead of genuinely trying to help, he was just having a bitch session. He then went right back to failing to oppose something he didn't believe in. He was not supposed to say those things on or off the record as a chairman of that meeting, or as a representative of the Finnish Standards Board, which was present as an independent, unbiased observer. What he did have was enough technical competence to understand what was wrong with the proposed standard, and asked if he could present his opinion as a private citizen. He was allowed to do that, and he also repeated that the opinion of the Finnish Standards Board would be the result of the meeting, regardless of his own opinions. In my opinion, he did the Right Thing.
  3. Re:So... by macshit · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Try a relevant analogy: You're a project leader at a company, ask to speak candidly, say, "I hate this project and I wish it would just die", are you really expecting to be allowed to continue leading that project?

    Er, no, that isn't a relevant analogy. The committee's job wasn't to promote MS's standard, it was to judge it. If a company was evaluating a potential expensive purchase, and the team leader candidly said "well let's be frank, this product sucks" before the "official" evaluation was over, people would either laud him for his frankness, or argue with his premise, but they sure as hell wouldn't fire him!

    Of course, if the Finnish committee sees its job as promoting Microsoft products, then of course your analogy would be correct -- and the committee should be charged en-masse with corruption.

    --
    We live, as we dream -- alone....