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

["Bron Gondwana" <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Jul 25, 2019, at 03:51, Lou Berger wrote:
> 
> On 7/24/2019 1:37 PM, 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.
> 
> It also doesn't work for those of us who have (albeit mild, in my case) 
> hearing issues.

This particular issue sounds like something which could be (at least theoretically) solved by having a "humming scribe" in the same way we have a minute taker and a jabber scribe (in the same way that a "vision scribe" might be useful for shows of hands and a chair with mild vision issues).

Cheers,

Bron.

--
 Bron Gondwana, CEO, Fastmail Pty Ltd
 [e-mail]