Comment by cycomanic

That's pretty selective quoting of the issues. He even says himself that the waiting for the patent is one of the minor issues.

The many questions he asks is why did they repeatedly change the evaluation criteria after the fact, presented results in a misleading ways, and made basic calculation errors (remember these guys are experts). All these in favor of one algorithm.

Now to someone like me this points to the fact that they really wanted that algorithm to be the standard. If we add to that the fact that there was significantly more NSA involvement than indicated and that they did their best to hide this, leads me to be extremely skeptical of the standard.