What did you think of Pete Resnick's draft about hums.
i like it a lot and have used it in other fora which are somewhat loose
or confused about consensus.
randy
On Aug 2, 2013, at 9:13 AM, SM s...@resistor.net wrote:
In my opinion part of the answer has been provided by Brian Carpenter. The
other part of the answer is the minutes. The rest of the answer is in
something mentioned in the Note Well.
Do you think I said something that contradicts what
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
Hi Ted,
At 05:47 03-08-2013, Ted Lemon wrote:
Do you think I said something that contradicts what Brian said? I
believe that I agree with him. But he's talking about how you
ultimately determine consensus, whereas I was talking about what
hums and shows of hands mean, and in what way they
Dave Crocker d...@dcrocker.net wrote:
On 8/1/2013 10:50 AM, Ralph Droms wrote:
In particular, the effect of humming versus
show of hands was pretty obvious.
The fact that the results were so profoundly different should get our
attention, enough to get us to consider specifying how to
On Aug 3, 2013, at 6:34 PM, SM s...@resistor.net wrote:
That one sentence covers all the points which are relevant. It's an Area
Director decision. It does not require consensus or any kind of number game.
The working group charter explicitly requires IETF consensus. But if you mean
In the case of a WG-forming BOF, it seems to me that a nucleus
of people willing and competent to do the work, and a good set of
arguments why the work needs to be done and how it will make the
Internet better, are more important than any kind of numbers game.
That one sentence covers
What did you think of Pete Resnick's draft about hums.
What did you think of Pete Resnick's draft about hums.
I thought well of it; I still do. When Pete planned to write it, I
offered to co-author it. But he said that once he got started, it all
just flowed out, and he wanted to present it as just his craziness, at
least at first.
It's not about
/
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Barry Leiba
[barryle...@computer.org]
Sent: 04 August 2013 05:55
To: Scott Brim
Cc: SM; Andy Bierman; IETF discussion list
Subject: Re: 6tsch BoF
What did you think of Pete Resnick's draft about hums.
I thought well of it; I still
On 8/1/13 6:25 PM, Melinda Shore wrote:
On 8/1/13 1:29 AM, joel jaeggli wrote:
Consensus for any particular outcome is in the end a judgment call.
Well, yes and no, but this situation strikes me as odd, and probably
a mistake on the part of the chairs. If you can't tell whether or
not you've
Hi Ted,
At 08:00 01-08-2013, Ted Lemon wrote:
We actually had a talk about this amongst
several IESG and former IESG members. I am not going to
Bernard Aboba once mentioned:
To paraphrase Tilda Swinton's Oscar Acceptance Speech:
To the IESG, you know, the seriousness and the
I found the process in the 6tsch BoF (Tue 1520) for asking about taking on the
work discussed in the BoF to be thought-provoking.
Toward the end of the BoF, the chairs asked the question 1. Is this a topic
that the IETF should address? First, the chairs asked for a hum. From my
vantage
...@gmail.com wrote:
I found the process in the 6tsch BoF (Tue 1520) for asking about taking on
the work discussed in the BoF to be thought-provoking.
Toward the end of the BoF, the chairs asked the question 1. Is this a topic
that the IETF should address? First, the chairs asked for a hum. From
particular outcome is in the end a judgment call.
Andy
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 1:50 AM, Ralph Droms rdroms.i...@gmail.com wrote:
I found the process in the 6tsch BoF (Tue 1520) for asking about taking on
the work discussed in the BoF to be thought-provoking.
Toward the end of the BoF, the chairs
.
- Ralph
The sum of the amplitude of all hums is not.
Andy
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 1:50 AM, Ralph Droms rdroms.i...@gmail.com wrote:
I found the process in the 6tsch BoF (Tue 1520) for asking about taking on
the work discussed in the BoF to be thought-provoking.
Toward the end
in the 6tsch BoF (Tue 1520) for asking about taking on
the work discussed in the BoF to be thought-provoking.
Toward the end of the BoF, the chairs asked the question 1. Is this a
topic that the IETF should address? First, the chairs asked for a hum.
From my vantage point (middle of the room
raised is comparable across tests.
The sum of the amplitude of all hums is not.
Andy
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 1:50 AM, Ralph Droms rdroms.i...@gmail.com wrote:
I found the process in the 6tsch BoF (Tue 1520) for asking about taking on
the work discussed in the BoF to be thought-provoking
On 2013-08-01, at 12:04, manning bill bmann...@isi.edu wrote:
we have never voted at IETFs.
we believe in rough consensus and running code
The enduring tautology in this is the use of the word we.
some of us believe in rough consensus and running code, probably enough that
the mantra is
Hi Ralph,
At 01:50 01-08-2013, Ralph Droms wrote:
Toward the end of the BoF, the chairs asked the question 1. Is this
a topic that the IETF should address? First, the chairs asked for
a hum. From my vantage point (middle of the room), the hum was
pretty close to equal, for/against. I
is not.
Andy
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 1:50 AM, Ralph Droms rdroms.i...@gmail.com wrote:
I found the process in the 6tsch BoF (Tue 1520) for asking about taking on
the work discussed in the BoF to be thought-provoking.
Toward the end of the BoF, the chairs asked the question 1
On Aug 1, 2013, at 11:14 AM, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote:
Hi,
Isn't it obvious why humming is flawed and raising hands works?
(Analog vs. digital). A hand is either raised or it isn't.
The sum of all hands raised is comparable across tests.
The sum of the amplitude of all hums
See draft-resnick-on-consensus for the art of running a group using hums
and other tools. With those nuances, I like hums.
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 4:24 AM, Yoav Nir y...@checkpoint.com wrote:
On Aug 1, 2013, at 11:14 AM, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote:
Hi,
Isn't it obvious why humming is flawed and raising hands works?
(Analog vs. digital). A hand is either raised or it isn't.
The sum of all hands
On Aug 1, 2013, at 3:30 PM, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 4:24 AM, Yoav Nir y...@checkpoint.com wrote:
On Aug 1, 2013, at 11:14 AM, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote:
Hi,
Isn't it obvious why humming is flawed and raising hands works?
(Analog vs.
We actually had a talk about this amongst several IESG and former IESG members.
I am not going to report the results, because I might remember them wrong,
but my thoughts on this are as follows:
- The hum is not a means of determining consensus; it is a means of determining
the sense of the
Ralph, et al,
Perhaps I have missed relevant responses, but it appears that folk are
missing what is significant here:
On 8/1/2013 10:50 AM, Ralph Droms wrote:
In particular, the effect of humming versus
show of hands was pretty obvious.
The fact that the results were so profoundly
We are not voting.
We are expressing agreement with a specific assertion.
That is true whether the agreement is expressed via vocalization
or motion of limbs.
Absolutely so.
The chairs can pick however they want to measure agreement.
Many chairs ask for a show of hands. I prefer that
On 8/1/13 1:29 AM, joel jaeggli wrote:
Consensus for any particular outcome is in the end a judgment call.
Well, yes and no, but this situation strikes me as odd, and probably
a mistake on the part of the chairs. If you can't tell whether or
not you've got consensus, you don't have consensus.
On 02/08/2013 01:30, Andy Bierman wrote:
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 4:24 AM, Yoav Nir y...@checkpoint.com wrote:
On Aug 1, 2013, at 11:14 AM, Andy Bierman a...@yumaworks.com wrote:
Hi,
Isn't it obvious why humming is flawed and raising hands works?
(Analog vs. digital). A hand is either raised
On 8/1/13 12:54 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
In the case of a WG-forming BOF, it seems to me that a nucleus
of people willing and competent to do the work, and a good set of
arguments why the work needs to be done and how it will make the
Internet better, are more important than any kind of
31 matches
Mail list logo
