Architects love an over engaged client. Remember, indecision and flip flopping are part of the process and highly encouraged. Also, late and missing payments only add to energy of it all. 

In all seriousness I love curious clients. I don't love nosy clients. It's a subtle but important difference. 

Ask questions with open enthusiasm and curiosity and I'm more than happy to walk anyone through just about anything. Just don't get cocky

I've had clients all over the place, the best are the ones that know what they want and don't try to put their hands in the dough; the worst are "magazine scanners" that want a different trend every other day but don't bother to look at the window schedule and don't answer questions for months - just yesterday I had to send a request to change the specs on already ordered windows.

.

"We now have a fireplace right in front of a floor-to-ceiling window lol architecture"

Hard to say without knowing the expertise and personality of the architect and client. Are architects turned off at all by clients who want to learn more about the ins and outs of the design process and construction? generally i'd say no. and architects should be happy to have a client that is interested in architecture. 

It would be a problem though if the client started nitpicking every detail, or trying to find 'shortcuts' in the construction process. sometimes when clients get really involved because they think they can come up with a silver bullet solution to make things go faster or be cheaper and.... often these proposed solutions are terrible. lol

Interestingly, an interview we did with a very well known residential architect in socal talked about this very question and why working with clients in the tech-industry poses unique challenges. you might get something from it.

With regards to the fireplace problem uuuu mentioned above perhaps something like this would be a solution. The view of the Pacific would be pretty much unobstructed for seated persons anyway.  It could also be relocated easier than a conventional fireplace.

Engaged clients can be the best, or they can be the. worst.  It really depends on HOW they engage themselves, and what their manner is.  Some of the best interior detailing I've done came about as a result of a total PIA client who was an engineer, and retired at the start of the project, leaving him with immense amounts of time to criticize every tiny detail of his house. On the one hand, I totally sympathized, because quite frankly if it were my home I'd be doing the same (I have a much harder time understanding the clients who ask us to design their personal private home and then can hardly seem to stir themselves to care about any aspect of it) -- however, it was really excessive and created a bad atmosphere on the jobsite at times, when the GC was hesistant to implement a certain design because he was sure the client would show up the next day and ask him to rip it all out.  Basically everyone on the project hated the client by the end of it, because he constantly stopped by and interfered.  However, he also did legitimately push me to come up with some really cool, crafty details and in the end the house was really phenomenal.  

So... I'd say, definitely get involved, but be careful to listen to your designer and your GC and don't just run roughshod.  If you're going to interfere, interfere EARLY rather than during construction.  Stop your architect every once in awhile and make sure you are paying $ for your interference -- ie, the architect will write her proposal based on a standard level of client involvement, and if you ask for too many iterations or want to go into extra detail on something where it wasn't envisioned, she's going to be stuck between pushing back on you (REALLY hard to do) and eating the cost.  If you can be self-aware about this, you should make sure that everyone's on the same page about what the proposal does and doesn't cover, and be forthright about asking your architect if you think you might owe her some additional services money.  When you're shopping around for a GC, make it known that you want to be involved throughout construction, and during the interviews be careful to select for a GC that is ok with that.  If the GC is not aware that that's how it's going to be, he is going to start to hate you during construction, and the LAST thing you want is a GC who hates you.  

Basically, just be upfront, and make sure you pay people for their time and quite frankly for the added client management/communication time they will be spending above what they typically would anticipate.

clients basically design it anyway, residential or otherwise.  That’s why there is so much shit everywhere. There was a time when architects were respected, and held unique skills and knowledge, and the client relied on that and trusted the designer. we are in the age of information, so the client can go on google images and tell you to do this or that, and shit out another design thinking they know best.