NoOOXML

As to whether the fast track was "abused" - strictly speaking (and contrary to much commentary) the fast track is not "designed for" any particular kind of spec. The Directives state "the criteria for proposing an existing standard for the fast-track procedure is a matter for each proposer to decide". However, I don't think you'll find (m)any NBs who think that putting this spec on the fast track was a good idea. Personally I would like to see both the fast track mechanisms in the JTC 1 process scrapped as a first step to improvement.

ISO is different, and this is in part because the Secretary General is not a "CEO" - this is not (in general) a top-down command structure but one in which the power is held by the members. There is clearly a need for reform and that needs to come from a coordinated consensus of countries who want to see that happen.

Also, to the extent that NB decision making is outside of JTC1's jurisdiction, we can create all the rules we want, and even follow them, and a company large enough, and with funds enough to pull in the token participation of a couple dozen island nations and desert dictatorships can override the collected wisdom of the relatively small number of NB's who care about the rules.