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

Are we bound by a 1992 slogan in perpetuity?

On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 1:38 PM S Moonesamy <[email protected]> wrote:

> 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
>
>