Re: Structure and substance: stability and flexibility

Subject: Re: Structure and substance: stability and flexibility
From: Andrew Plato <intrepid_es -at- yahoo -dot- com>
To: Techwrl-l <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 08:36:34 -0700 (PDT)

Carnall, Jane wrote ...

> Now, if we could all just agree to ignore AP when he starts shouting that we
> DON'T NEED PROCESSES, we might actually have a good argument/discussion
> about how we can achieve that.

You clearly have not read my posts completely.

I never said I don't use processes and do everything in chaos. You're
type-casting my argument just to make your own point.

My argument is: Content is more important than process. Extensive process and
procedure and the expense of knowledgeable writers is wasteful.

YES! I use processes, systems, and structure - but NEVER at the expense of the
topic.

Andrew Plato

Up, down, turn, around: http://members.home.com/aplato


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints!
http://photos.yahoo.com




Previous by Author: Chicken and the Egg
Next by Author: Re: Chicken and the Egg
Previous by Thread: Structure and substance: stability and flexibility
Next by Thread: RE: Structure and substance: stability and flexibility


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads