Regarding talking to people to get early feedback, get up to speed in a field, etc., you might find this post useful (if you haven’t already seen it).
I also sometimes worry that people would actually like to chat more, but my reluctance to waste their time interferes with both our interest to chat.
I find this relatable. Relatedly, in the above-linked post, Michelle Hutchinson (the author) wrote:
Try to make the conversation concise, and to avoid going over the time allocated. I really appreciate when people do this when I’m talking to them, because it means I can focus on thinking through the ideas rather than also making sure that we’re sticking to the agenda and get to everything.
I commented that I’d slightly push back on that passage, saying:
I think it makes sense for this to be the default way one approaches conversations in which one is seeking advice. But I think a decent portion of advice-givers would either be ok with or actually prefer a more loose /​ lengthy /​ free-wheeling /​ non-regimented conversation.
There have been a few times when I’ve arranged to talk to someone I perceived as very busy and important, and so I’ve tried to be very conscious of their time and give them opportunities to wrap things up, but they repeatedly opted to keep talking for a surprisingly long time. And they seemed genuinely happy with this, and I ended up getting a lot of extra value out of that extra time.
So I think it’s probably good to be open to signs that one’s conversation partner is ok with or prefers a longer conversation, even if one shouldn’t assume they are.
Thanks! Yeah, I sometimes wonder about that. I suppose in rationality-adjacent circles I can just ask what someone’s preference is (free-wheeling chat or no-nonsense and to the point). Maybe that’d be a faux pas or weird in general, but I think it should be fine among most EAs?
(Sorry for barging in on this thread :D)
Regarding talking to people to get early feedback, get up to speed in a field, etc., you might find this post useful (if you haven’t already seen it).
I find this relatable. Relatedly, in the above-linked post, Michelle Hutchinson (the author) wrote:
I commented that I’d slightly push back on that passage, saying:
Thanks! Yeah, I sometimes wonder about that. I suppose in rationality-adjacent circles I can just ask what someone’s preference is (free-wheeling chat or no-nonsense and to the point). Maybe that’d be a faux pas or weird in general, but I think it should be fine among most EAs?