Re: Online 'hum' (was: Re: Yesterday's IETF)

Hi Martin, Stephen, Brian,
At 09:58 PM 23-03-2026, Martin J. Dürst wrote:
>I don't know how difficult it would be to 
>implement, but what about replacing the yes/no 
>choice with a slider, say from 0 to 10 (or even 
>continuous). Also, let people change their settings while the poll is underway.
>
>This would get us closer to humming, where 
>volume can be variable and adjusted to 
>surroundings. It would still produce a number, 
>rather than just an impression of strength (or weakness) of approval.

Brain mentioned anonymity.  The tool, or the 
above suggestion, and the "hum" allows for some 
form of anonymity.  The "hum" was described as 
emphasizing that "we do not vote.  The statement 
was based on a 1992 belief: "We reject: kings, 
presidents and voting."  The question which comes 
to my mind is whether the current practice would 
be viewed by an external bystander as voting or not.

As Wes pointed out, there were moments of 
conflict and moments of calm in the past.  A 
newcomer might have found some of the conflicts a 
bit strong.  Nowadays, the stakes are higher.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy