[framebit]

A little bit of stage fright is generally healthy. It shows that you care enough to be concerned and you're not getting too cocky. That's an old lesson I learned doing (of all things) middle school acting class and it's proven itself to be true over and over again.

Think about your slide and presentation style. For example, I have enormous decks for most of my talks (think like 55 slides for 30 minutes) but I burn through them very quickly, usually less than 20 seconds per slide. I came from film editing before moving to software so I approach my Powerpoints like a movie, it's just my nature. Others have really short decks that are information dense so the emphasis is on the talking part of the talk and the slides just provide a reference in the background. Others forego slides in favor of straight-up demos, which is certainly slick if you can pull it off (high risk, high reward) and need little pictorial illustration.

Use the old 5 paragraph essay rules from high school as a starting point for structuring your talk: tell you're audience what you're about to tell them (thesis, topic, core argument) and how you're going to tell them (outline), then tell them (supporting paragraphs), then tell them at the end again what you told them and how you told them (conclusion, restating your intro).

Humor helps, generally. This isn't supposed to be a standup set so definitely don't go overboard, but it can really help. Particularly if you can tie it in with some empathy for your audience. ("We're gonna do this in Perl. I love writing Perl, you just hold shift and smash the number row for awhile.")

And for heaven's sake don't read your slides.

[daphneokeefe]

When the slides contain a lot of text, it is not possible for me to simultaneously read and comprehend the slide and understand what the speaker is saying. The slide appears, I start reading. You start talking, so I have to decide where my attention goes. Often it is neither the slides nor the speaker, just a jumble of words coming at me. Then the next slide comes up...

[miketuritzin]

I feel like the solution to this is to have slides without a lot of text on them, but then include what you say in the "speaker notes" section when you distribute them so that people who didn't attend the talk understand them.

[chengiz]

I think the 5 steps is too "high school" and overrated for the adult world. Sometimes there is no time nor audience patience for cliches like "how you're going to tell them" and "how you told them". Intro, content, what's next. That's all that matters.

[framebit]

That's why I said "as a starting point."

The five paragraph form itself is a beginner's tool: any good essay will deviate.

However, one nugget to borrow from the five paragraph form is the centrality of the thesis statement. Having a thesis for your talk is _crucial_ IMO. It doesn't have to explicitly stated, and it could be as simple as "I'm going to convince you that $FEATURE is awesome," but you need a focal point. You could restate what I'm saying here as honing your elevator pitch for you talk or in any number of different phrasings, but the idea is the same: a short statement that sums up the absolute core idea of your talk and provides a focus for you and your audience. Anything that doesn't fit your thesis is a good candidate for trimming.

[mamcx]

This is a good resource about how do better slides:

http://presentationzen.blogs.com/presentationzen/2006/01/con...

[jxy]

There's really nothing wrong to read your slides. The trick is coming up with more explanations.

[timr]

Everything is wrong with reading your slides. Really...don't do it. In fact, your slides shouldn't have much text at all, because it's a distraction from where your audience should be placing their attention: You.

Ideally, you should never need to look at your slides while giving a talk. Every time you turn away from your audience, you lose a little of their attention.

[throwaway5752]

That's way overstated. Just don't only read your slides verbatim. Some people may not be able to see slides because of obstruction or their vision, so repeating key points is almost a courtesy.

I appreciate it when a slide is a visual piece with limited text, and the notes are roughly true to the spoken portion (for when slides are distributed after a talk).

[timr]

It really isn't. Your goal should be to have no text, and never look away from your audience during a talk.

You can (and should) repeat key points, but every time you read, you lose your audience. And yes, you can have a little bit of text -- but since most people go too far in the other direction, it's best to aim to eliminate text entirely.

Slides should be simple graphical content to provide signposts and communicate things that otherwise cannot be expressed vocally.

[throwaway5752]

I think you're overshooting in your advice in the service of preventing the bigger mistake of turning around and reading slide contents verbatim (on which I certain agree with you). That's fine, but for veteran presenters, I think your advice is wrong. First, you should have text because you lose your audience no matter what (sneezing, emails, bathroom, etc). You should let them recontextualize and that involves judicious use of text. Also, everyone asks for slide decks after talks and they should be useful in that case even without a recording. Lastly reading doesn't mean, "turn away from your audience and read", it is the same as repeating key points - this can be done for emphasis or pacing, as long as it's intentional. This is my opinion based on my experience, at least.

[timr]

"Also, everyone asks for slide decks after talks and they should be useful in that case even without a recording"

I am happy to provide copies of my slides, but no, I am under no obligation to make them useful without me presenting them. They're my tools, not your reference.

IMO, this expectation has been driven by bad presenters leading people to believe they can get the same content without bothering to show up to the talk. Maybe that's true, but if it is, you should wonder why you're giving the talk at all.

[white-flame]

If your slide contains a picture, whose details you're describing (say for instance a medical photo or city zoning plan or something), certainly you want your audience's visual attention on it as you're describing its pertinent specifics.

[jxy]

Are we actually talking about tech talk?

I can understand marketing talks where all you need is you and your words, accompanied with some useless images.

It would be an utter waste of time if a tech talk turned up like that.

[timr]

Smart people always vastly overestimate the technical interest level of their audience. Even in audiences composed exclusively of brilliant, technical people, the average level of commitment to whatever you're saying is damned near zero. Accordingly, you must keep your message exceedingly simple. Thinking is hard for everyone, and you have to persuade people to do it. It doesn't come for free.

You may not like "marketing", but you're giving a talk to sell a vision. Always. Once you win people over, they'll seek out the details for themselves.

[jxy]

That's why more and more talks are simply bullshit.

[walshemj]

No I afraid it is not - the fact that its about "technology" does not really change the talk that much when compared to speeches in the roman senate.

You still use the same rhetorical devices and ethos pathos and logos.