Echo JS 0.11.0

<~>
vnk 3794 days ago. link 1 point
The subject is interesting but I was a bit let down by the talk itself. If you want a (hopefully constructive) critique...

...I think the talk lacks in structure. But first: I don't mind much about you Umm-ing a lot, because I can assume that's due to nervousness or inexperience or whatever and that's ok. So don't worry about that.

The first thing I missed is an "introduction to the problem". You start the talk with the topics slides (Why, How, What) which do layout the content to be presented but what is missing is a "this is the problem, this is what we are trying to solve". I mean, you start to point out the benefits (automation) but you haven't even presented *what process* we need to automate. You need to spend maybe 2, 3 minutes talking about that process, what it entails, before explaining why it needs to be automated.

More generally, I guess the talk lacks structure. You know. Introduction to the problem, overview of possible solutions, conclusion. In particular you need to understand that introduction and conclusion at least as important in a talk as the rest of the content. And you sort of have a conclusion about three quarters of the way and after the conclusion you bring up something that looks like a totally different subject (Browserify). And then... you present a recap, but it doesn't really fit; it's like "now that I've made you forget about our conclusion, let's try to get back to that".

And the problem with structure in a talk is that if you don't have a very clear one, you'll fail to make a point, to transmit a clear message.

I hope I don't sound too negative with this.

Replies