Web app for IETF
We reject kings, presidents and voting. We believe in rough consensus and running code. We believe in HUMs.
IETF, the Internet Engineering Task Force, is the most important standards body for the Internet. Its main product is RFC documents that define protocols. For example, the IP protocol is defined by RFC 791, the HTTP protocol is defined by a series of RFCs, TLS 1.3 is defined by RFC 8446. The IETF has a very long history and very detailed processes associated with its operation. It has been holding 3 annual face-to-face meetings for a very long time, and is only now moving more fully into virtual meetings. In fact the first fully virtual IETF meeting is the upcoming IETF 107, taking place next week. The IETF consists of dozens of working groups, and they come to decisions using a process called “rough consensus” which means that most participants are in favor of a certain decision and there is no large faction against or an even smaller faction but with strongly held opinions. Quoting “the Tao or the IETF”:
One fact that confuses many newcomers is that the face-to-face WG meetings are much less important in the IETF than they are in most other organizations. Any decision made at a face-to-face meeting must also gain consensus on the WG mailing list. There are numerous examples of important decisions made in WG meetings that are later overturned on the mailing list, often because someone who couldn't attend the meeting pointed out a serious flaw in the logic used to come to the decision. Finally, WG meetings aren't "drafting sessions", as they are in some other standards bodies: in the IETF, drafting is done elsewhere. Another aspect of Working Groups that confounds many people is the fact that there is no formal voting. The general rule on disputed topics is that the Working Group has to come to "rough consensus", meaning that a very large majority of those who care must agree. The exact method of determining rough consensus varies from Working Group to Working Group. Sometimes consensus is determined by "humming" — if you agree with a proposal, you hum when prompted by the chair. Most "hum" questions come in two parts: you hum to the first part if you agree with the proposal, or you hum to the second part if you disagree with the proposal. Newcomers find it quite peculiar, but it works. It is up to the chair to decide when the Working Group has reached rough consensus.
The lack of formal voting has caused some very long delays for some proposals, but most IETF participants who have witnessed rough consensus after acrimonious debates feel that the delays often result in better protocols. (And, if you think about it, how could you have "voting" in a group that invites all interested individuals to participate, and when it's impossible to count the participants?) Rough consensus has been defined in many ways; a simple version is that it means that strongly held objections must be debated until most people are satisfied that these objections are wrong. See also this article for another view on the humming practice.
With the move to virtual meetings, real audio-based humming is no longer an option. We would like to develop a replacement that preserves as much as possible of the spirit behind this practice but is workable for widely distributed virtual working group meetings.