Table 1 summarizes the current estimates of m from the various methods of measurement. In general, the methods based on virialized objects favor low values, while the global measures (with the exception of the age argument) and the analysis of large-scale structure and flows tend towards higher values. The estimates that indicate very low values (~ 0.1 - 0.2) have plausible loopholes. On the other hand, none of the estimates that favor high m values actually requires that m is as large as unity. It thus seems that a tentative consensus can be reached at a (not very elegant) value of about m 0.5. This was reflected in the debate on formation scenarios by the fact that the competing CDM models were the Einstein deSitter m = 1 ``standard'' CDM (with n ~ 0.9) or Hot+CDM, versus the Open CDM and Flat () CDM models with m 0.4. Not too long ago these low-m models used to be associated with m ~ 0.1 - 0.2. It seems that progress is being made towards convergence. The activity on many fronts of this field promises that we will know more in the near future. We hope that the above discussion will be of help in the effort to reconcile the various estimates with a unique value of m.