There's a basic principle at stake: don't lie and don't mislead, either
directly, indirectly, or through omission. We make an exception for
April 1 RFCs, which may do all three.
Eliot
On 5/30/15 5:14 PM, David Farmer 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).
Eliot
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.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature