On Aug 1, 2013, at 5:32 PM, Dave Crocker <d...@dcrocker.net> wrote: > Perhaps that doesn't bother other folk very much but the differential result > was so extreme -- as a single-event experiment -- it strongly suggests we > should not call for hand-raising. (The likely explanations for the > difference are pretty straightforward. Whether our community of engineers > wants to believe the explanations or not doesn't matter The data should be > sufficiently compelling.)
I thought this was fascinating too. And there may be some cultural issue at work here. But letting the negative hums indicate a lack of consensus all by themselves would have been wrong: that's not how you determine consensus _either_. So what do you think should have been done differently? To be clear: >> The other question raised in my mind is why the initial result from >> the hum, which did not have a consensus either way, was not >> sufficient. > > Exactly. This is a point of working group management that should prompt some > concern. If when the hum comes out indeterminate, you conclude that you do not have consensus, you are holding a vote.
