(I wrote this paper but forgot to publish it, sorry! I’m still gonna publish it as a bit of a retrospective on what I prepared…!) Got all loaded up decked out for the big paper bonanza; practice talks, draft papers with Double T’s, and more…

I am not great at writing proposals. In fact, I am absolute 🐕 💩 in many aspects. But, I had feedback and help, so I wanted to put out some tips so that when people write proposals they are much less trash when they hit the Committee. I want to read 🔥 💯 ✌️ papers when they hit the Committee, rather than being the fuel for a trash-fire.

The warm up is done, and it is time to choose. Not between Apples and Pears (would pick apples, by the way). It’s time to make some choices about something that’s been looming over the Standards Committee for a long time, and is part of two pretty important papers in the San Diego mailing:

It’s time to review a few more papers! Last time, we did simple papers (which still generated a lot of… interesting discussion) but now we are going to move on to some larger, meatier papers.

There are 274 papers in the San Diego mailing! But some of them hardly need committee time, but they’re simple enough that there’s only one answer…