Re: [105attendees] Agenda Bashing was Re: Administrative Plenary Time Constraint: Must End by 21:00

["Pete Resnick" <[e-mail]>]

On 24 Jul 2019, at 13:37, john heasley wrote:

> Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 12:39:20PM -0400, Ted Lemon:
>> I think any kind of solution that involves peer pressure isn’t 
>> going to work well.
>>
>> It might make sense for us to agree in advance to some questions we 
>> would like answered, and then ask the crowd to hum “I feel that 
>> this answer was adequate” and then “I feel this answer is not 
>> complete, please continue.”
>
> I disagree with 7282.  I think humming is an awful approach to 
> expressing
> dis-/interest in any topic.  1) remote attendees can not hum, nor 
> those
> on maillists to which any question must be referred, and as/if there 
> is a
> move toward more remote participation then even fewer can hum.  2) 
> anonymity
> doesn't allow opponents (or proponent) to ask for explanation nor to 
> attempt
> to persuade.  3) non-, dis- & interest often sound equal, resulting in
> nothing learned or the person with the largest diaphragm wins.
>
> Humming should not be used/seen as a solution to behavioral problems.
>
> This humming ritual should end.

In what way do you disagree with 7282? I think 7282 makes most of the 
points (in different ways) that you just made.

pr
-- 
Pete Resnick http://www.episteme.net/
All connections to the world are tenuous at best