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

Martin Duke <> Fri, 10 July 2020 01:49 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60D1D3A0B5B; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 18:49:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ixX4wcqIFVVo; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 18:49:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d32]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E67FA3A0B55; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 18:49:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id c16so4410274ioi.9; Thu, 09 Jul 2020 18:49:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=S/jNmaCnUcs1gbve76bREYEhcxGdRS2SrNTDAv4jcKM=; b=aaTRU+FzANxdCVVw5Rk33X/CRT1szuXP1SxUj7ttsTZxUNji9k6EqR1wps9r/A60JI bzB8bUnzeNkdu3pJsMUUFC78bSGZ8vwEQzIxXVC2ozmDi1/vTKPgzRQ8qlsr179dSkaK HA1QLKL1U+9fe4jsOD2KTRvzaBgJ7SLdPNj+tYaohrbG3q80RSgLPcgPcmaboFXRH3hT rua9B2qa1JUa3Qh1HXe6Jd3REdwhpe5zHL2edKKCM8UseAgRYWTijv+ToW0E7YgmBYH1 b7evBzC9fKZXdPWjGhxVD4RnNnOXs8+aC4CPOP1AP4w1W5YIBdUsYOqtLm+aAdl1/0Jy Oy/g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=S/jNmaCnUcs1gbve76bREYEhcxGdRS2SrNTDAv4jcKM=; b=R77GHfGYG5HsNJf4CvQfnrIQQ6r4IT3bc6dBaTCVFKym8adKzAP0JgyN5n3Ux8v5S4 RgzqLI6a4VHSj6CQP/2crn++fh8o27hSxrtY7fV6Gx0vxX2iMZHlTlsCR1ED73ujL5zv uC0AqyxXkAxtDPhz0n2QXQEIcLl0/VaFXWX2MDWM51vqbdjRqvBfBC/mQKbK5cYbVpmB SusQXHa+j+5/K3dwhLFA2oKct1hQ7MI0UqA8splSCDSEFRKowCyZsv/srfuQmedscn/V syhyfY6fmIRA47hqZfb0pwwXhRaObl+ulrxMGGNTOVH5AvSj22QpJJWzrVf5othrYieU bgow==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5313TP9RI1rQkv6dIDjlFqJkWbMoatpHMnjtc66Ohjn0Ewdsu39V qRfMLJktUGNp5bdZJHfl/dDbee6RRuCRmq3jZrU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJylbIjaQC6AZQ2Tzqniys8kQeCrBKf1zL88f42WW2A2Eqytmi3KCMHGn0+XJjXKOH5hjIRNx14qisSoiWd19uY=
X-Received: by 2002:a02:6381:: with SMTP id j123mr37456246jac.103.1594345793252; Thu, 09 Jul 2020 18:49:53 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Martin Duke <>
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2020 18:49:41 -0700
Message-ID: <>
To: Paul Wouters <>
Cc: "Scott O. Bradner" <>,,
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a7f0e505aa0c8e4a"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [108attendees] Introducing the Meetecho Virtual Hum tool
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mailing list for IETF 108 attendees <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2020 01:49:55 -0000

Paul, I believe my original email answers your questions.

On Thu, Jul 9, 2020, 18:23 Paul Wouters <> 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