I suspect it’s a bit more nuanced that this. Factors include the size of the audience, how often you’re interjecting, the quality of the interjections, whether your pushing the presenter off track towards your own pet issue, whether you’re asking a clarifying question that other audience members found useful, how formal the conference is and how the speaker likes to run their sessions.
whether you’re asking a clarifying question that other audience members found useful
This is a frequent problem in math heavy research presentations. Someone presents their research, but they commit a form of the typical mind fallacy, where they understand their own research so well that they fatally misjudge how hard it is to understand for others. If the audience consists of professionals, often nobody dares to stop the presenter with clarificatory questions, because nobody wants to look stupid in front of all the other people who don’t ask questions and therefore clearly (right!?) understand the presented material. In the end, probably 90% have mentally lost the thread somewhere before the finish line. Of course nobody admits it, lest your colleagues notice your embarrassing lack of IQ!
Sure; unfortunately what’s happening at rationalist conferences is that frequently the most socially unaware/attention seeking person in the room is speaking up, in a way that does not actually contribute, and encourages other socially unaware people to go do it at other talks.
I suspect it’s a bit more nuanced that this. Factors include the size of the audience, how often you’re interjecting, the quality of the interjections, whether your pushing the presenter off track towards your own pet issue, whether you’re asking a clarifying question that other audience members found useful, how formal the conference is and how the speaker likes to run their sessions.
This is a frequent problem in math heavy research presentations. Someone presents their research, but they commit a form of the typical mind fallacy, where they understand their own research so well that they fatally misjudge how hard it is to understand for others. If the audience consists of professionals, often nobody dares to stop the presenter with clarificatory questions, because nobody wants to look stupid in front of all the other people who don’t ask questions and therefore clearly (right!?) understand the presented material. In the end, probably 90% have mentally lost the thread somewhere before the finish line. Of course nobody admits it, lest your colleagues notice your embarrassing lack of IQ!
Sure; unfortunately what’s happening at rationalist conferences is that frequently the most socially unaware/attention seeking person in the room is speaking up, in a way that does not actually contribute, and encourages other socially unaware people to go do it at other talks.