Codeulate.

So wait, maybe you should publish your standard as to what qualifies a good speaker.  That way the rest of us can make sure we aren’t offending you by opening our laptops too soon!

Ben, obviously I agree. But I have to tell you that when teaching to students at both Harvard and the University of Minnesota, nowadays students bring their laptops, and it is with heaviness that they assent to my injunction that they close their laptops (they really look at my like I’ve farted — and this is at the start of the class, so they don’t even know whether I’m boring yet). In fact, after we’ve gotten past a couple of lectures, and I know that they know that they CAN pay attention, I usually let them open them back up — or task them with something to do when they open them.

Well Brent, I’d say it’s up to you decide if a speaker is underprepared or boring. If you feel that your time is being wasted, then go ahead and rectify that.

That said, I’ve written a bit about what I think makes for a good speaker: http://speakingforhackers.com/pages/dont-be-boring

John,

I’ve been toying with an idea for my talks that might work well for you. What about “Please close your laptops. Feel free to open them again as soon as I start boring you.”

This makes explicit the implicit message that laptop use sends. It will probably also feel more fair to the students since you’re giving them an out, though the social pressure will likely prevent them from taking it. You also might get some useful feedback if any of them truly feel bored enough to go for it.

I just found it interesting that you start out by pointing out the disrespectful behavior of those coding during a talk, then state that you have no problem taking the same action if you find the speaker boring or underprepared.  Seems like a slippery slope!

BTW, I totally agree with your main point, but I TRY to withhold judging whether someone else’s opinion is less valid that my own.

I hear what you’re saying. Here’s my thinking:

Everyone (and especially a speaker trying to teach you something) deserves your respect, initially. However, someone who has disrespected you does not. A speaker who has not prepared well and made an effort to be engaging has shown disrespect for his audience’s time. At that point, I don’t think he’s still due your respect.

So who designates the appropriate time-frame to make that decision?  Is it possible you make the decision after 5 minutes, but someone else comes to that conclusion after 2 seconds?

I am pretty sure you are talking about people who never close the lid, even at the start of the talk, and according to my standards, they are indeed disrespecting the speaker.  I have fallen short of my own standards though by trying to finish something before turning my attention to the speaker.

I was there often, staring at my laptop instead of at the speaker, being a rude asshole. So this post speaks to me, and has a apoint.

However, some of these times I had a really good reason to have my laptop open, e.g. tweeting about the talk, reading other tweets/IRC chats about a talk (for particularly entertaining talks, this backchannels of audience chatter is really fun to participate in), and sometimes I would be writing code to present later in a lightning talk because conferences often inspire me in that way (and I find it a good thing).

However, maybe it’s not necessary to tweet/chat about the talk in real time. Maybe we have to rethink is this really valuable to us, or would it be more valuable to leave our devices off and just concentrate on the speaker. I’m not sure yet. I like that technology gives us a dimension to “participate” in without actually interrupting the speaker on stage.

I was recently at a conference where there was no wifi. Almost nobody had their laptop open, read tweets, or tweeted from their devices. It was very interesting because there was much more focus on every talk than on every other conference I have been at. I’m still not sure it was actually better for everyone. It’s a tradeoff.

I agree with Brent.  I think the key sentence in the OP is “You are disrespecting the speaker’s effort and distracting those around you.”  See, even if I think the speaker is boring, or not worthy of my attention, that doesn’t give me the right to make that decision for everyone else around me.  If you find that you are bored by the talk, then leave.  You’ll be a distraction for the few seconds it takes for you to walk out, but that’s better than being a distraction all the way through the presentation.

That could work. Thanks for the idea.

I’m going to ask them to put their laptop screens down for the first hour when I go over the course metadata – and during that time, I’m going to say a few words about the costs (and perhaps the occasional benefits) of multi-tasking, etc. I have the most good will during that first hour, and if I can be non-boring then, they might keep the screens down.
But I think the best approach in a classroom setting is to introduce exercises / opportunities to “try stuff out” right now. By that means, I get some interactivity and the addicts get a chance to satisfy their urge. Like a smoking break.

In my experience, a real catch with the undergraduate classroom setting — different from a professional conference or user group meeting — is that things can be quite “boring” for the student even when the instructor is “not boring” because of the immaturity (both emotional and intellectual) of the audience. [Aside: I'm not saying that professional Ruby audiences can't be emotionally and intellectually immature.] A routine experience is to get a tepid evaluation from a student and then 5 or 10 years later have the student tell you that in fact the course was the most interesting one they took — but they didn’t have any perspective when actually going through the course.

[The populations at Harvard Extension and the U of Minnesota are really different, too. I'd say I get more mental engagement at UMN.]

One could easily argue for the inverse: start with the laptop open and it’s the speaker’s job to be so amazing that you close it to listen.

But really, if the talk sucks: leave.

It also provides a seat for one of the non-bored people watching from the hall.

I think people deserve respect regardless of whether their presentation is up to snuff. They might have poured work into it and simply be a bad public speaker. Opening up your laptop is just going to make them more nervous, and make their presentation worse for everyone else watching it.