• Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    9 months ago

    Also, if someone just says “you’re wrong about X” that’s way easier to deal with than “considering this other paper says these things, can you explain your motivation for X?”.

    Those questions are the worst.

    • Nonagon ∞ Orc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      9 months ago

      I find that to be the other way around. I would much rather have people ask the second kind of question, whereas the first kind will give me nothing to work with. In the worst case you can answer that you havent read thtose papers and you will after the presentation. At best they can actually teach you something you haven’t considered yet. But often you can respond with your motivation which you generally thought about for much longer than they did.

    • cactusupyourbutt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      that is a very scientific environment. of you cant deal well with the second question youre at the wrong place

        • candybrie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Most researchers I know welcome difficult questions. Like that’s the whole game. Finding the difficult questions about your work and answering them.

          A lot of the time, it sucks of you only get bad questions or no questions. It usually means your work was uninteresting or so poorly presented no one grasped enough to even ask about something relevant.

        • fidodo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          If a subject is a scientific passion of yours, you don’t dismiss good questions, you welcome them.