I had a conversation with a few early-career philosophers at the Eastern APA about conference Q&A etiquette, and we thought it might be fun and useful to dedicate a thread to the issue here at the Cocoon. Specifically, we thought it might be fun to develop a lighthearted taxonomy of different kinds of Q&A behaviors, and then helpful to discuss their etiquette. Here are a few examples I came up with (each of which I think I have either witnessed or been guilty of at some time or other):
The Bait and Switch (AKA "the Setup"): asking a seemingly innocuous question of clarification, and then responding to the speaker's clarification with a Definitive Refutation of the speaker's entire paper.
The N+1: An audience member has already asked question X or given objection Y some number of times N. They figure if they give a variation of it just one more time, the speaker will finally understand. :)
The Enough About Me, Let's Talk About Me: different variations of the following, "In your paper, you argued p. In my article N number of years ago, I argued ~p. Let me tell you about my argument...[N* minutes pass]...How do you respond to my argument?"
Do you have any lighthearted descriptions/names for common, peculiar, or questionable Q&A behavior you've witnessed? And do you think the behavior described is appropriate conference etiquette or not? Why? Finally, if you think the behavior is bad form, what (if anything) should session chairs (or session attendees?) do to prevent or respond to the issue?