5 ms·
Pet peeve: During Q&A, the presenter should repeat the question. Even if the asker has a microphone, they are often not clearly audible. Repeating the questio
by dmckeon 2y ago
Pet peeve: During Q&A, the presenter should repeat the question. Even if the asker has a microphone, they are often not clearly audible. Repeating the question, or a brief version of it, lets the audiences, both present and via video, hear it clearly, and shows that the presenter heard and understood it before they answer it.
- samatman 2y agoHard agree. The OP is full of good advice, but this is the single most actionable thing I could say about tech talks. Maybe 10% of presenters do this; everyone should. Another advantage is that the speaker doesn't always get the question. Either can't hear it well, or the question itself is weird, complex, off-topic, or some variation on not-even-wrong. So they end up answering something else. If they repeat/summarize the question first, at least they're answering a question, and when this happens, the question which gets answered is often better than the one which was asked.
- teeray 2y agoHot Take: there should be no Q&A. Best-case scenario, the questioner uncovers some omission that the speaker tweets out later. Average-case is irrelevant questions or some super-specific case that makes the speaker question if they can bill consulting hours to the questioner. Worst-case is giving a self-aggrandizing questioner a microphone to attempt to upstage the speaker. None of these are a benefit to the audience except in the first (uncommon) case. Just go find the speaker later and ask questions if you have them.
- jldugger 2y agoOr if you must, just don't broadcast the Q&A section.
- shalmanese 2y agoHard disagree, the point of the talk is the Q&A, otherwise I can just watch it on YouTube. I design my talks so the rehearsed content is only the preamble. The rest of the time is spent in discussion. For an allocated amount of time, I create a talk that is 1/3rd the time and then supplemental material that can fill another 1/2 if the crowd can’t be warmed up. But there’s an art to Q&A that’s as hard as public speaking but practiced by 1/10th the people. A simple hand vote is the most basic tool. After a Q, I’ll summarize it and ask how many people face this problem? Etc. why get an audience of people in a room if you don’t use them?
- teeray 2y agoMy comment reflected the typical, unmanaged conference Q&A where every question has an equal platform, regardless of merit. If there is a way for the audience to upvote questions that are actually good (yes, bad questions exist) as you mention with your hand vote, then it becomes worthwhile again.
- shalmanese 2y agoI don't expect anything from the conference organizers apart from what's typically given. My point is, I despise presentations that could have been a Youtube, if you're going to give a presentation, make the experience unique to the people in the room, view the prepared sections as just enough to kickstart your intended impromptu part. This is a skill in and of itself and you just need to practice it to get better but most people aren't aware/don't try and I view it as a massive missed opportunity.
- serial_dev 2y agoIt's also useful if the person asking the question has a very thick accent or is not proficient speaking English. It happened so many times that I had no clue what someone asked, and the presenter repeats the question with their own words, usually much more clearly communicating the question that was asked.