Re: Yesterday's IETF

Michael Richardson <[email protected]> Wed, 25 Mar 2026 14:20:18 -0400

Newsgroups	gmane.ietf.general
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

Stephen Farrell <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>> Could the "hums" has fallen in disuse have the
    >>> unintended effect of reinforcing the idea that we do vote?
    >> I don't think so.

    > I do think so.

    > I don't know how to fix that whilst aiming for equality between
    > in-person and remote participants though. But maybe there's a
    > way?

0. ideally, all polls are known before the session starts, and are presented
   for wordsmithing sufficiently in advance that poor wording can be eliminated.

1. the straw-poll is conducted around a clearly articulated question for
   which there has been sufficient discussion.

2. the results are used to inform consensus, to determine if it's one loud
   voice of rough objection against a silent majority of support, or
   against a significant disinterest or lack of opinion.

3. that we remain curious (and courteous) about the reasons for objection,
   summarizing that briefly (even if pseudonymously) into the minutes, and
   into an email thread that explains any tusscle that has arisen.

So I would to see polls that ask, "Objections to adopting foo-example?"
and that the choices are something like Object/Support/Have-Not-Read/Do-not-care.

--
]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        |    IoT architect   [
]     [email protected]  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 487 B)