Re: Introducing the Meetecho Virtual Hum tool

[Martin Duke <[e-mail]>]

IIUC the best way to do this is via jabber.

On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 3:08 AM Christian Hopps <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Will there be a function that captures a non-anonymous raising of hands
> (like the email list or the in-person meeting)? Not all WGs use hums.
>
> Thanks,
> Chris.
>
> > On Jul 9, 2020, at 2:00 PM, Martin Duke <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > From: Martin Duke <[e-mail]>
> > Date: Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 4:59 PM
> > Subject: Introducing the Meetecho Virtual Hum tool
> > To: <[e-mail]>
> >
> >
> > The IESG and IETF LLC are working with the Meetecho team to add the
> capability to conduct “virtual hums” in fully remote meetings. A software
> model model that shows the output for given numbers of people humming is
> available for experimentation [TEST_SITE].
> >
> > Working Group chairs seeking “a sense of the room” are invited to use
> this tool to help obtain it. As always, consensus ultimately requires
> confirmation on the email list.
> >
> > The current implementation is based on a specification the IESG
> developed [I-D.duke]. Briefly, the workflow is as follows:
> >       • A chair begins the hum in meetecho
> >       • Participants have 20 seconds to hum loudly, softly, or not all
> >       • At the conclusion of the hum, Meetecho will report the
> approximate loudness of the hum, on the following increasing scale: niente,
> pianissimo, piano, forte, fortissimo.
> >
> > As there is no IETF consensus that offline hums have specific flaws, the
> current specification seeks to reproduce the offline version as faithfully
> as possible. The SHMOO working group [SHMOO] might reach consensus on a
> different set of requirements in the future, and update or replace this
> document.
> >
> > The community will have an opportunity to try out this tool at
> participant [PARTICIPANTS] and session chair [CHAIRS] training sessions
> beginning 15 July. Feedback is welcome on the manycouches mailing list. In
> particular, practical operational issues (e.g. bug reports, usability
> concerns, security weaknesses) and strong, unambiguous consensus for
> feature changes might be actionable prior to IETF 108. More contentious
> philosophical concerns are best left for long-term consideration by SHMOO.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Martin Duke
> > On behalf of the IESG
> >
> > [CHAIRS] https://ietf.org/how/meetings/108/session-chair-guide/
> > [I-D.duke]
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-duke-shmoo-virtual-hum/
> > [PARTICIPANTS]
> https://ietf.org/how/meetings/108/session-participant-guide/
> > [SHMOO] https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/shmoo/documents/
> > [TEST_SITE] https://jsfiddle.net/Jay_Daley/yqgr9pnb/
> >
>
>