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

Keith Moore <> Tue, 28 July 2020 03:48 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BF183A0BAD for <>; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 20:48:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.918
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.918 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_NONE=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 vbCT4Klcm2Y4 for <>; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 20:48:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 212D53A0BAB for <>; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 20:48:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal []) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13FE81454 for <>; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 23:48:56 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 27 Jul 2020 23:48:56 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=; h=content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=+CTFDo T3GRKw5naQDe34Da8ou2PVALNajV950AtHVyw=; b=Z7jaXWTDUvhUaGmWKyZFmf QXOMW/s6t8OOxDX3q2VGogC/H4pv2aC9vc4/AnDOWuLzX/ufG2ndQxOey8nW1XlH yShh5f/Eow3fl5Pg2UUUY1gZEGzZB8/9/RUl9IRjAQ8eldRTcn5yL73UF7xuM7gD HoFxW8r0xqnCHqKclCKuYKL22tohL9+lIzrk4s94pAYKYKJ8o9x2LbbJzl4qdrGk FhrqG3DqsBdVfVGMfzeA2oMc42eLr8gybTihh5bIsP6Z+LeZwggFIhqu+LhUPMwj +zvrGBKkPGpTDVB14p7I5xC93/0agTCmD/I9vh3HMImmof7deuYQ+cZSuoxJpS8Q ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:J6AfX0_06pS6v263jV0jgG1NcfS01fMdLMxK797XxFaU-apnxI_6Gg>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduiedriedugdejgecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhepuffvfhfhkffffgggjggtsegrtderre dtfeejnecuhfhrohhmpefmvghithhhucfoohhorhgvuceomhhoohhrvgesnhgvthifohhr khdqhhgvrhgvthhitghsrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeevfeetudeigedtle dvvddtudefjeejffdvfeetjeeiueelgfdtgfegtdffkeetudenucfkphepuddtkedrvddv uddrudektddrudehnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilh hfrhhomhepmhhoohhrvgesnhgvthifohhrkhdqhhgvrhgvthhitghsrdgtohhm
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:J6AfX8sbU4JQWGTSNevoFkBzfBu_tXgUqnMmWtCCuxaY6p0XL4TzOg> <xmx:J6AfX6CP38jBk1X32MDtHgRyneIPocwzd0_lyNAmiXBl_RayQEASPQ> <xmx:J6AfX0dTnc67Mn_efGRpJWTAMVuoNCS57_B0tUnaDjvSj7tg_HU5dA> <xmx:J6AfX7sBE9BPiqdYcwyxSqdctTlNCcKedIhhXbrjc2TomVZlRO66HA>
Received: from [] ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 53AB530600A3 for <>; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 23:48:55 -0400 (EDT)
References: <> <> <>
From: Keith Moore <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 23:48:54 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------28D33D83E4CC5C6C4CA5E216"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [108attendees] Fwd: 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: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 03:49:00 -0000

On 7/27/20 11:23 PM, Bret Jordan wrote:
> I have yet to see a WG meeting that hasn't used the hum like a vote.  
> We just need to accept the fact that the hum is a pseudo 
> anonymous voting mechanism. Yes we want to believe we are not voting, 
> but in reality we are. Sorry. Maybe you do not see it, because you 
> want it to be something it is not.
I have yet to see a WG meeting that /has/ used the hum like a vote.

Part of the idea of humming is that a simple majority is completely 
insufficient to justify a decision, and there's no specific threshold 
for doing so.   Another part of the idea of humming is that each 
participant can hum at a different volume level according to his or her 
level support for the question, so that strongly held opinions can carry 
more weight than weakly held opinions.

Both of these are useful properties for a group that makes decisions by 
rough consensus.   For instance, humming isn't as vulnerable as voting 
to tyranny of the majority.  Of course a hum isn't by itself a 
determination of rough consensus, but it can be a useful way of 
determining whether rough consensus is near or distant.