Just in case Lloyd missed the most obvious unwritten rule, I-Ds intended to be April 1st RFCs are *never* posted as I-Ds. (Actually, that might even be a written rule.) Another important unwritten rule is: start early. Great ideas invented in mid-March rarely make it through the unwritten process. Regards Brian Carpenter On 28/06/2018 17:32, John C Klensin wrote: > > > --On Thursday, June 28, 2018 01:39 +0000 Lloyd Wood > <eclipticplane2002=40yahoo.co.uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> on a related note, we need an established April Fools >> workgroup with a published charter and clear path for draft >> adoption and RFC publication. >> >> >> jokes are funnier once they've been workshopped... > > Lloyd, I disagree. I think most jokes, especially the sort of > complex ones that have tended to appear in the April 1 subseries > of the RFC Series, are funnier if they come as a surprise and > have not first been tuned and kicked into submission if not to > death. > > However, I suggest an experiment. Why don't you write and > propose an April 1 RFC that describes, in detail, what you think > the vetting and evaluation process for those RFCs should be. > For example, perhaps there should be a committee with members > chosen by the Nomcom, the IAB, the IESG, the Board of the new > IASA LLC, and, if they can reach consensus, a committee of five > religious leaders from as many different religions chosen by the > IAB Chair and the G7 (with or without Russia)? I would presume > that such a document would also describe, in detail, the limits > of political correctness or incorrectness allowed in such RFCs > and whether puns or other wordplay that depend on languages > other than English are acceptable and under what conditions. > > best, > john > > >
