I'll try to address your many questions, Lucsandra.

First, I'm not a debater, and I'm not giving suggestions about how to debate. I'm giving suggestions about how to deliver presentations in formats like training classes, conferences, and meetings.

Yes, I have given hundreds of presentations that were not scripted, but rather given off the cuff working from what's on my slides. In all of these situations, I have a fixed amount of time and a lot of information that I want to deliver to the audiences. Therefore, it's important to plan, structure, and prepare them to cover the material and achieve the objectives so the audience is satisfied.

That's a very different kind of talk from just having a few ideas to kick around and see where it goes and how the audience reacts. I knew a consultant once who offered "The Seminar with No Name." No agenda, no structure, no expectations, no slides, let's just talk and see what happens. Fine, and that could be fun and stimulating -- it's what we call a "conversation." But how many clients will pay for and attend an event like that? It's very different from a training course or conference presentation, which does have clear expectations and objectives on the part of both the speaker and and audience, which is what I'm addressing in this article.

I get plenty of mental exercise in dealing with random reactions from the audience during Q&A sessions. Also, as a consultant, I've sometimes just sat in a room for a day with a procession of individuals coming in one after the other and we talked about whatever their concerns and questions were. Yes, that's stimulating, insightful, fun, and a good learning experience. But it's not the same as giving a presentation in a fixed period of time where certain content has to be delivered that the audience is expecting.

I've also done interviews in which I know the expected questions in advance. This lets me do some mental preparation. I can give good answers off the top of my head. I can give excellent answers if I've thought about the question a little bit first. Would you rather hear good answers or excellent answers?

I don't understand your question, "Secondly, why do you think we need to make sure people's perceptions aren't impacted by the way we present?" Did I say that? I said, "If people walk out of a talk without thinking differently or deciding to work in some new way, what was the point." So I don't understand what you are saying.