On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 11:11:53AM +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 11:00:35AM -0500, > Nico Williams <nico@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote > a message of 17 lines which said: > > I'm surprised not to find there anything like a survey of RFCs, > > current I-Ds, and maybe even expired I-Ds, of problematic > > language. [...] Can we ask the author, and/or maybe the RPC, to > > perform such a survey? > > It would require a definition of "problematic language", something > that the discussion proved next to impossible. [...] Sure, but Knodel clearly has an idea of what problematic language is and made a proposal around it, therefore Knodel could have included (and yet could include) a survey based on that idea. I'm rather curious about that. By the the proposed definition, the one the IESG approves of, do we even have a problem, has it been getting better naturally, or worse?
