Problem statement draft comments

[Thomas Narten]

<Basavaraj.Patil at nokia.com> writes:

> But as someone else also mentioned, is humming really the right way to
> gauge consensus in a WG since a WG meeting does not truly represent all
> interested WG members (being present at the meeting)?

Not a simple yes/no question, IMO. It can be useful and reasonable if
done well. That is, if the outcome is that almost everyone agrees the
outcome is reasonable, fair and defendable and didn't improperly
exclude legitimate input.

And of course, the final outcome needs to be ratified on the mailing
list. But, if the hum is done right, by definition there shouldn't be
major push back on the mailing list. I.e, if the hum agrees on X, but
there is a lot of pushback on the mailing list, that raises basic
questions about whether enough of the right people were in the room
for the hum to go on a particular direction. Or that the issues that
are coming up on the mailing list were adequately considered before
the hum took place.

> My view is that the really active members of a WG are at a meeting and
> hence the hum does gauge consensus.

One has to be careful here to make the above a blanket statement. It
can be the case in many cases. But not necessarily always. So, I think
it's a bit dangerous to assert that hums in face-to-face meetings are
the final word. They are just the sense of the room. But certainly, if
participation in a hum includes a good representation of the WG, one
would expect similiar results when going back to the list.

Thomas