Path: utzoo!dptcdc!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!think!barmar
From: barmar@think.COM (Barry Margolin)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: Re: Subliminal (RFC1097)
Message-ID: <39356@think.UUCP>
Date: 18 Apr 89 18:10:26 GMT
References: <6462@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> <3270014@hpctdkz.HP.COM>
Sender: news@think.UUCP
Reply-To: barmar@kulla.think.com.UUCP (Barry Margolin)
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 21

In article <3270014@hpctdkz.HP.COM> jeff@hpctdkz.HP.COM (Jeff Hughes) writes:
>    I am confused. Is RFC1097 a joke or what? If so, no one is laughing.

Maybe you aren't, but I chuckled when I read it.  It was dated April
1, so I recognized it immediately for what it was (I don't think a
serious RFC ever has or will be published on that date).  It was good
satire, as it was written in the precise style of normal Telnet option
RFC's.  It was funnier than the usual Usenet humor, which is mostly
made up of Star Trek: The Next Generation parodies, definitions of
"Real Programmers", and computer folklore discussions that degenerate
into lists of all the silly things naive users do to floppy disks.
But the proof of the pudding is that some people actually believed it,
despite repeated warnings in news.announce.important to be on the
lookout for April Fool's Day hacks.  The other funny thing is that
there are still people flaming about it nearly three weeks later.

Barry Margolin
Thinking Machines Corp.

barmar@think.com
{uunet,harvard}!think!barmar