--On Saturday, May 30, 2015 10:14 -0500 David Farmer <farmer@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> On May 30, 2015, at 01:48, Eliot Lear <lear@xxxxxxxxx> 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