Your honour, allow me to explain. Monopoly is not easy. All that bribery and corruption, it leaves little money for the shareholders, who are often starving children. (See picture exhibit A). Also, Bill and Melinda (smiles at jury) give lots of money to great causes (see picture exhibit B, smiling child playing "kill the penguin" video game).

So you see, if we cannot compete with ODF we will lose our document monopoly. And then, the kids will starve!

Now, to conclude, we agree that OOXML is a pile of steaming crap. Yes, this is true. But we will fix that, as soon as it is standardised and passed to an incompetent ISO committee for maintenance. You can trust us, after all.

Your honour, think of the children. Oh, and your cheque is in the post. Thank you.

I have a problem finding "Why should we adopt OOXML as a standard?" and I hope someone will help me to clear this out.
My impression is that approving a standard normally is a positive process, ie the initiator of the standard has to come out with arguments of why their product is worthy of being a standard. I fail to find any such official Microsoft documents regarding why is OOXML good.

So far we have endlessly pointed technical errors in the specification, legal terms it is released under, interoperability claims, that a draft standard documented in 6000 pages should not be fast tracked. All this has been either ignored so far by Microsoft, or has mixed results.

However we seem to fail to remember that Microsoft and ECMA as initiators of the standardization process have the obligation and the responsibilty to point out the advantages of OOXML in a short, official press release or at the voting process itself. The default vote for a standard should be against, and they have to prove it is worthy of our attention. It should not be considered adopted by default and we have to point flaws in it, before the deadline, it's exactly the other way back.

A similar positive process is the trial of a murder suspect (juridical process of charging someone for killing another) . By default the suspect is consider innocent until further notice. That is until the accusing attorney (prosecutor), as initiator of the trial, brings up enough evidence to prove that the suspect is indeed the murderer. The defending party only has to take down the prosecutor claims as false arguments/proofs.
Positive process tend to have finite destinations, while negative ones hang indefinitely.

We should ask for Microsoft to come out of defending themself and present a clear case as why should we support the process of standardization of the OOXML file format in it's current "fast track" format. This is something they have failed to provide to the public so far and we failed to ask for it.
Similarly the NoOOXML party should make such a final pledge (final essay/ oratory held to the judging party). To be readable, by most people who don't even know what a file format or a standard are, we should try to avoid the technical details other than pointing to other documents presenting those technical flaws we find. This should be an essay presenting in 2-3-4 pages why OOXML is bad as a standard.
After hearing the pledge from each side everyone could understand the positions of both sides and could judge for themselve who is right and who is not.