On Aug 1, 2013, at 3:30 PM, Andy Bierman <andy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 4:24 AM, Yoav Nir <ynir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On Aug 1, 2013, at 11:14 AM, Andy Bierman <andy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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 is not. >> >> Hums are better as they give greater weight to people who are more vocally in support (or in opposition) to the assertion. > > Please provide some evidence that a loud hum means the person is more > committed to work on an item. > > Favoring loud humming is subject to cultural bias. As is identifying oneself with a position by raising one's hand. I can imagine as much - my uninformed opinion would be more - cultural bias effect on a show of hands as on a hum. > Some cultures are more inclined to raise their voice than others. > Some people have naturally louder voices than others. > Measuring volume may introduce bias in favor of loud men and against > soft-spoken women, for example. And a show of hands may introduce bias against women preferring anonymity. - Ralph > > This cultural bias is not compatible with increased inclusiveness. > > > Andy > >> Research shows([1]), that the one humming loudly for acceptance, will also volunteer to review and contribute code. The one humming loudly against is going to jump up to the mike in all future meetings and tell the group that they're doing the wrong thing. Those who hum softly will go back to reading their email. >> >> Yoav >> >> [1] citation needed >>