ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: IESG Statement on surprised authors

2015-05-30 11:55:39


--On Saturday, May 30, 2015 10:14 -0500 David Farmer
<farmer(_at_)umn(_dot_)edu> wrote:

On May 30, 2015, at 01:48, Eliot Lear <lear(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com> wrote:

I like this draft, but I suggest that it apply to ALL RFCs
(not just the IETF stream).
...

Sorry but I disagree. Not ALL RFCs, to exemplify why, I think
the use of a humorous nom de plume or a sarcastic
acknowledgement would be perfectly legitimate for RFCs
published on a particular day in the spring.

Authorship, contribution, and acknowledgement are serious and
important issues, but that is no reason to completely abandon
or exclude humor and sarcasm in appropriate doses.

Indeed.  In addition, I think the principle that each stream
should have the option of following the IETF's lead but
modifying it for local circumstances or striking out on its own
is an important one to preserve for all sorts of reasons.  There
are also bits in the draft that I'd expect the RFC Editor might
adopt as general policy, but, again, the principle that the RFC
Editor and not the IESG, makes those decisions is important.

   john