[NikolaNovak]

100%. One of the things I'm drilling into my team (we do a lot of slides!), is you have to decide - are you making slides for:

1. presentation - should be sparse, key, anchoring data that enables people to ground themselves while they listen and pay attention to YOU

or

2. Reference - dashboard and background and details and density

If a deck may be used for both purposes, intentionally or not (e.g. we expect it to be shared and referred to by people not attending), resist the urge to do a hybrid slide, and if at all possible make presentation slides at front, reference/supplementary slides at back.

Worst situation is when somebody uses what are effectively reference slides for a live presentation. People's attention is split between reading and making sense of dense information on screen, and the key important points you are trying to verbalize.

[zeruch]

"resist the urge to do a hybrid slide, and if at all possible make presentation slides at front, reference/supplementary slides at back."

This has been my SOP for years, but its amazing how resistant some folks are to it (like $NUMBER_OF_SLIDES is the sole measure of quality...with "more slides are bad, mmmkay" being the default). I fought with my last boss on this endlessly, as I would rather have many slides with small digestible chunks of info that I could scaffold my presentations through at a brisk clip, and they preferred as few slides as possible, with dense text and charts, that they would elaborate on in long exposition.

I always got better positive feedback, to no avail. My decks would be 'edited' into a compacted slop-fest. Drove me batty.

[potatolicious]

One effective way of juggling the two types of slides I've found is to stick the reference slides into an appendix that isn't part of the actual presentation - but can be quickly pulled up during ensuing discussions, and for the benefit of people reviewing the slides later.

High-level stats during the actual presentation, meaty details available upon request.