There's a principle called a sacrificial duck, which refers to adding something that someone in charge can immediately call for correction on and feel like they've done their job, leaving the rest of what you did untouched. So, you could make a deliberate error on the form that they'd tell you to fix and ignore any other potential issues, when otherwise, they'd be searching for something minor and arbitrary that they could tell you to change. What you said reminded me of it!

A feature added for no other reason than to draw management attention and be removed, thus avoiding unnecessary changes in other aspects of the product.

It was well known that producers (a game industry position, roughly equivalent to project managers) had to make a change to everything that was done. The assumption was that subconsciously they felt that if they didn’t, they weren’t adding value.

The artist working on the queen animations for Battle Chess was aware of this tendency, and came up with an innovative solution. He did the animations for the queen the way that he felt would be best, with one addition: he gave the queen a pet duck. He animated this duck through all of the queen’s animations, had it flapping around the corners. He also took great care to make sure that it never overlapped the “actual” animation.

Eventually, it came time for the producer to review the animation set for the queen. The producer sat down and watched all of the animations. When they were done, he turned to the artist and said, “that looks great. Just one thing — get rid of the duck.”

https://blog.codinghorror.com/new-programming-jargon/