Re: Not Technical Enough

[Mike Stockman <stockman -at- jagunet -dot- com>]

On 6/1/00 9:29 PM, Dan Emory (danemory -at- primenet -dot- com) wrote:

>If any of them had ever taken an academic course in Statistics,
>they'd know that such anecdotal evidence is meaningless. My
>prediction is based on the likelihood that what has happened in the past
>will happen again, given the same conditions (that at least is what a
>History major would argue).

Thanks for condescending... not too many people on this list will do so, 
and I've recently felt a lack.

Your "prediction" is based on exactly what, that happened in the past? 
Has there been some wholesale purge of tech. writers I haven't noticed in 
15 years in the industry?

I do recall that, around a decade ago, there was a general series of 
"company downsizing" that resulted in both talented and untalented people 
being on the street. The talented got new jobs, and the untalented 
changed careers, I'd assume, or waited until the next shortage of writers 
and hopped in again.

Your "anecdotal evidence" that people with majors in English are somehow 
the first ones up against the wall when the revolution comes lacks any 
citations (can you provide some?) and smacks of misguided elitism. Your 
privilege, of course, but in the end, this will be true:

Good writers will keep their jobs, or get new ones quickly. Bad writers 
won't.

That's always the situation when layoffs hit, and it is likely to 
continue that way. Any attempts to describe which educational background 
constitutes the "good writers" should be backed up in facts.

Have a superior day,
----->Mike

_______________________________________________________________________
Internet: stockman -at- jagunet -dot- com                           AOL: MStockman
                                       AOL Instant Messenger: MStockman