This snippet from the FOMC Minutes (rundown of the whole thing here), a nod to the hawks at the FOMC meeting:

Some other participants, however, expressed concerns about delaying the start of normalizing the target range for the federal funds rate much longer. For example, a significant delay risked an undesired buildup of inflationary pressures or economic and financial imbalances that would be costly to unwind and that eventually could have adverse consequences for economic growth. In addition, a prompt decision to firm policy could provide a signal of confidence in the strength of the U.S. economy that might spur rather than restrain economic activity. These participants preferred to begin policy firming soon, with most of them expecting that beginning the process before long would allow the target range for the federal funds rate to be increased gradually.

Let me just pull out one or two bits ...

a prompt decision to firm policy could provide a signal of confidence in the strength of the U.S. economy that might spur rather than restrain economic activity

This is what 'some other participants' wanted to do. How many is 'some'? Who knows, but it can't have been many given the vote to hike was lost. Anyway, the Wall Street Journal reckons a hike like this would not have been a good idea, 'cause the NFP missed last week... "such a move would viewed as a mistake. After last week's soft September jobs report, this would almost certainly have been the case". The Journal is right, it would have been "viewed" as a mistake. Which is silly, its just one number, and the resemblance of the NFP result to a lottery has been made far too many times in the past for me to repeat it here.

Anyway ... back to that quoted paragraph ... and this bit:

These participants preferred to begin policy firming soon, with most of them expecting that beginning the process before long would allow the target range for the federal funds rate to be increased gradually

'Most' of these participants. How many of them was there? It must have been at least 3 if we can then say 'most' (at least 2 of 3).

Ahhh. All too hard. I think I'll look at price action, that's much easier.