Re: [108attendees] Introducing the Meetecho Virtual Hum tool

[Martin Duke <[e-mail]>]

Paul, I believe my original email answers your questions.

On Thu, Jul 9, 2020, 18:23 Paul Wouters <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On Thu, 9 Jul 2020, Scott O. Bradner wrote:
>
> > btw - I assume that this, like a hum, is is anonymous - all you get is
> aggregate volume and not, as Fred asks, vote totals or have any
> > way to find out who hummed and who did not  - I also assume that if
> 1/10th of the people on the call (for lack of a better word)
> > hummed loudly and no one else hummed at all the result would be very low
> volume (i.e. the volume is based on the total
> > # of people that could hum rather than on just those that did)
>
> I find humming at times have been wildely differently interpreted than
> what I heard. In physical meetings we dont have easy tools to vote
> anonymously. But when we are meeting virtually, I would have expected
> us to improve the humming system - not implement its real flaws, in this
> case potentially literally amplified and send looping back.
>
> Why not a flag or button to set, with the results anonymized and rounded
> up/down based on the size of the meeting. So we get answers like "25% of
> the room" or "just a few people" or "the vast majority".
>
> Seeing as a lot of the times, the humming questions are confusing, a
> place for the WG chair to write down the question and possible answers
> would also have added clarification to our current virtualized emulated
> humming system.
>
> Paul
>