Hang on I thought Ph.Ds were socially awkward people who were passive and silent in meetings only occasionally asking brief questions with no follow up, and seem like they would prefer to just do the whole meeting in 2 or 3 emails. I am not sure which stereotype to believe anymore.
If we really want to get specific, phds are generally trained to be comprehensive in their discussions, rather than concise, which is a slightly different flavor of annoyingly verbose from the typical incompetent communicator or individual who was trained to be rewarded for volume of "participation" more than anything (the latter of which tends to creep into org structures anyway)
