Who defends GXS actions under alias?

Im sure that most freelance EDI Guys and Product or Sector Advocate / Analysts are busy guys and gals, getting work done or finding new work, even when you are presently engaged, ’cause that’s how us self-employed guys do it….and our customers know that we are always prospecting. My last (+1/2 time to way past full-time) engagement has run longer than any previous client workload, and for that, I am very thankful.

But I keep feelers out, and make a few calls, and some people call me, actually…it’s true! And someone took an alias, and kinda made my day, because if you read the coward’s verbiage, you can tell who he works for. It’s that transparent.   And, Comments are always open on this blog. 

This guy or GXS gal, is very, very unhappy that I’m going to market with four years of GXS opposition, competitive, and client-polling  research and interviews because I never would have compiled this data if not for GXS’ Interconnection abuse campaign waged under the pen of Steve Scala, and also likely by one or two more vindictive GXS evil mini exec’s –

because after a half-year of  playing ECGridOS API Evangelist (last half of 2009 and the first half of 2010) – things were going pretty-pretty-pretty well (Thanks to Larry David) .

So, who would take the time to troll me by email, How bad is it at GXS?

See here at GlassDoor.

Before anyone says, “all of the Glassdoor reviews are disgruntled employees, …yada yada” Well, how many bad reviews are there? Go ahead.  I mean really – So for your reading pleasure, here is a GXS troll – again, who would take the time otherwise.????

Here is the most recent out-of-order non-sequitur , because this particular ‘weak sister”, comes up with more clever opprobrium than anything I could originate or say, because he says some so darned damning and effective stuff:

From Robert Renner:

Your portfolio of failures keeps adding up – I know about your other work assignments – not just with Todd – pretty soon you’ll be ready to work for a not for profit – I forgot you did that on your last assignment …  — abmadw@gmail.com wrote:From: Alan Wilensky <abmadw@gmail.com>To: “daisy.chain” <Daisy.Chain@lottos.com.au>

I, under my real name…..ABM:
“Let’s hear your real name buddy, and why are you so upset…..you need your own blog!!!
Here is the first unoriginal email trolling me and trying to hurt my soft inner ego; This is not bloody likely as my second time around married was to a real…….never mind, she was a tough crowd, lets’ leave it at that. 

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Robert Renner <Daisy.Chain@lottos.com.au>    Now, wait a minute, this can’t be Rob Renner of Liaison fame?  Why would the CEO of Liaison be a shill for GXS?
Date: Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 8:06 AM
Subject: Best of Luck in the New Job
To: abmadw@gmail.com
I am glad that the EDI Forum discussion can get back to normal without your rant – it has been 4 years of listening to you and Todd publish a bunch of nonsense. Hopefully you can find a career in something that keeps you off the EDI blogs / why not donate your services to the US government given your rant about the FCC and the DOJ not doing their job – maybe a bright guy like you can fix things there

My emphasis in bold but his words. Please note the email address used by the masked GXS shill.hmmmm/….

Continuing the laughs:

Robert Renner

6:29 PM (2 hours ago)

to me

OMG – you are so pathetic and naive.  You actually think people are reading your blogs and care what you have to say.  The only folks that read your blogs are people who still laugh over the work you perform.  We loved your latest venture and your EDI project – Your good friend Todd has got to be delighted that your advise ran his business into the ground.  I see he thanked you by renewing the contract (NOT).  Your latest venture is just another example of the bad advice you dish out to clients.  Amazing that anyone pays for the service you provide.

From: Alan Wilensky <abmadw@gmail.com>
To: Daisy.Chain@lottos.com.au

Subject: Re: Best of Luck in the New Job

Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2013 09:58:41 -0400

I answer under my  Real Name – – -:
 I’d rather fight for  real issues that affect real people with real business at stake, than act like a coward behind a false identity. I have learned that  anyone sticking up for GXS in the midst of this controversy, is bought off –
At least I fight for causes that I choose, whereas you shun the Public forums, and eschew a real identity,
I publish under my name. I get new work, and repeat business, and many recommendations  – and all of my contracts are at will  – Mr. Gould had me on from 2009-2013.
Todd, The President of Loren Data Corp, was already embroiled in the  routing dispute with GXS (the largest EDI Network),   and could have terminated my work schedule any time. 
But, Unlike a GXS VAN Contract, I have no punitive get out clauses.

As anyone can see, under the pseudonym of “Robert Renner”, someone at GXS, it seems, is quite uneasy about something – for to take up the pen and complain to me about my contract work for Loren Data? Yes, my work for Mr. Gould and Co became all GXS all the time, with Trade Relations, regulatory policy and issues advocacy….
editorial relations, etc. So?

At GXS, Mouthpiece Extraordinaire, Steve Keifer, nattering on about, “Daisy Chaining”;  can someone source that term for me, with a relevant reference to the modern practice of Layer Seven messaging and supporting technologies? I can’t find an RFC or  X12 specifications for hops,, i.e., how many are too many? Are all routing systems bad that are not GXS approved? Here is the rub: I don’t think GXS knows, and GXS does not care a fig about system reliability or transaction / message visibility. They have a mess on their hands with TGMS, the one outage per week VAN with a statistical guaranteed to fail at peak season, while providing inaccurate reports across all the relevant parameters of interest.

And, it’s all staffed by a Byzantine Organization of siloed teams. Let me look up your last call in my notes sir.

Was there ever a credible study of intersystem routing,  and hand-offs applied to network messaging systems? Has any credible engineer ever proven that an extra hop is deleterious, in actual tests??? I do not think they can prove it.  ECGrid has been processing GXS SPS traffic for 13 years, and,  of course Message Relaying is ubiquitous, no matter which system architecture or protocols named, Everywhere ‘networked data’, especially in payload routing, such as email, Fax over IP handling, and all manner of intercompany data, especially EDI and email, all are flung around a company’s global WAN, VPN, etc.

Daisy Chaining is a Neologism created by GXS, as a rationale to fall back on if pressed for an explanation – GXS simply lucked out in the 5th Circuit, where the Appellate Panel let it slide. But how so?

We live in a post-antitrust era:  Federal Court Judges and the USDOJ (including US Attys executing the Atty Gen’s mandates), State Attorneys General….. the majority of these aforementioned guardians of the law and competition  have collectively decided not to engage in trust-busting.   From time immemorial, mediocre companies have squandered PE and through technical incompetence, caused the daring and creative innovators to throw in the towel.   But to reduce a brilliant man’s life’s work, telling lie after lie about ersatz issues which are the actual opposite of the truth –  and every point made by Steve Kiefer. in the EDI Provider article, are intentionally misleading, self-serving truths

But, guys like Kiefer can’t do their own thing, if they are told to lie, they lie. But the facts are known, and the ever-growing cohort of GXS clients are, as a group, becoming increasingly frustrated, due to the harm done to their suppliers; after all, Loren Data Corp was formed in order to service a growing population of smaller suppliers, now able to leverage EDI technology via a new class of On-Demand, now called Cloud Service Providers.

My final comment is:

I have nothing to hide, I publish everything in my own name, unlike the above coward. 

What kind of person feels the need to write these things? I know who, a GXS exec or a shill that does not want any compiled research to be delivered to GXS Customers and  competitors, such as IBM and Opentext –
Keep up the laughter, GXS shill, because no disinterested bystander, even colleagues with professional animosity, would ever spend a second writing me  to sound off on these issues.Has anyone or does anyone take a pro GXS stance? The writer of these hit and run under alias email sounds upset.
Are you The Francisco Partners….who collectively failed to get the GXS IPO or a sale of the GXS “Titanic”.
GXS and FP are flummoxed, how else are these explained?