Re: Not Technical Enough

Subject: Re: Not Technical Enough
From: "Ed Hanson" <edhanson -at- uswest -dot- net>
To: "Mike Stockman" <stockman -at- jagunet -dot- com>, "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 21:42:10 -0600


While I agree with you in principle, that that is how things should happen,
I have seen enough of corporate bungling to know that decisions like who
they keep and who they let go are rarely based on sound logical, rational

Ed Hanson

|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
|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,

Previous by Author: Framemaker - Trial
Next by Author: Re: To change a light bulb
Previous by Thread: Re: Not Technical Enough
Next by Thread: Re: Not Technical Enough

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads