Re: Proposed solution for DPEP (Diversity Problem Entry Point) - IETF Ap

Subject: Re: Proposed solution for DPEP (Diversity Problem Entry Point) - IETF 
April 1 jokes. Date: Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 12:30:30AM -0800 Quoting Melinda 
Shore (melinda(_dot_)shore(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com):
> Doesn't it strike you as odd that this discussion has moved towards some
> sort of tacit/accepted acknowledgment of the role of joke RFCs as
> insider/outsider cultural markers rather than just clever bits of writing
> that are widely enjoyed?  I'm a little surprised to find myself developing
> sympathy for tiresome humorless whiny people.  (Wait, no I'm not).
>       
> Anyway this strikes me as an unfortunate use of those documents.
Breaking my own promise to shut up I'll just try to share my (unfinished)
thoughts as why this is so.

Perhaps it is a reaction to the "businessisation" of the IETF. Everything
needs to be justified and documented (which for the most part is
good. Until it is not). So in order to keep the pastime that these
documents are,  we jerk and try to assign them procedural meaning. When
we simply should say "They are a funny way to look at ourselves busy
trying to describe the world" -- but we've somehow lost faith in that. Oh
to be an arts major and just being able to place feelings in words and
have them graded as passing the exam. ;-)

-- 
Måns Nilsson     primary/secondary/besserwisser/machina
MN-1334-RIPE                             +46 705 989668
... I'm IMAGINING a sensuous GIRAFFE, CAVORTING in the BACK ROOM
of a KOSHER DELI --

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature