4 ms·

I'm opposed to this, because a lot of times the personalities who do this are asking the question not because they want an answer, but because they want to show

by drblast 16y ago

I'm opposed to this, because a lot of times the personalities who do this are asking the question not because they want an answer, but because they want to show off in front of a large room. You're also putting the speaker on the spot; rarely does the public question result in a meaningful conversation between the asker and the speaker. If you want to show interest in the speaker's topic, talk to him after the presentation. It's a lot more comfortable for all involved, particularly those in the audience who genuinely aren't interested in anything either of you have to say.

mquander 16y ago
It sounds like you're opposed to bad questions, not questions. If you're listening to a talk that's at all interesting, you ought to be able to manage a good question by the end of it. If the audience genuinely doesn't care about good questions, then that's their fault for sitting there.
T_S_ 16y ago
You're not putting anyone on a spot they aren't already on. Speakers love questions. You are right to save the off-topic or minutiae questions for later, but if you don't understand something, you are certainly not alone. So ask.
dotBen 16y ago
I'm really conflicted on this topic: I do agree there is much value to be had from asking at least one question per conference... but what would happen if all attendees had the same attitude. Aside from massive lines to the microphone, the main concern is that really important/pressing questions might be lost because more eager beavers got up to the mic to ask their token 'must as at least one' question first.
- kscaldef 16y ago
  Note that that's not what the author of the article says. "If it looks like nobody is going to ask a question, I get up and ask my prepared question. If someone actually does run to the microphone, I won't try and beat them (unless I have a question that I really want to ask). It's not that I need to ask a question -- I'm happy as long as someone asks a question."

by drblast 16y ago

mquander 16y ago

It sounds like you're opposed to bad questions, not questions. If you're listening to a talk that's at all interesting, you ought to be able to manage a good question by the end of it. If the audience genuinely doesn't care about good questions, then that's their fault for sitting there.

T_S_ 16y ago

You're not putting anyone on a spot they aren't already on. Speakers love questions. You are right to save the off-topic or minutiae questions for later, but if you don't understand something, you are certainly not alone. So ask.

dotBen 16y ago

I'm really conflicted on this topic: I do agree there is much value to be had from asking at least one question per conference... but what would happen if all attendees had the same attitude. Aside from massive lines to the microphone, the main concern is that really important/pressing questions might be lost because more eager beavers got up to the mic to ask their token 'must as at least one' question first.

kscaldef 16y ago
Note that that's not what the author of the article says. "If it looks like nobody is going to ask a question, I get up and ask my prepared question. If someone actually does run to the microphone, I won't try and beat them (unless I have a question that I really want to ask). It's not that I need to ask a question -- I'm happy as long as someone asks a question."