Re: Do'ers and Doubters (was observation about engineers)

Subject: Re: Do'ers and Doubters (was observation about engineers)
From: Andrew Plato <intrepid_es -at- yahoo -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 16:38:00 -0700 (PDT)

--- Dick Margulis <margulis -at- fiam -dot- net> wrote:

> On the other hand, in an earlier thread (a month or so ago), we divvied
> people up into goal setters and problem solvers, and we reached some
> sort of consensus that tech writers are problem solvers, not goal
> setters. I guess the tech writers we hire are problem solvers and the
> ones you hire are doubters and none of them are goal setters, right?

I don't think goal setting and problem solving are mutally exclusive
things. I see a lot of goal oriented people who are also exceptionally
good problem solvers. I think these are merely two good traits to have
regardless of whether you do or doubt.

Tech writers are a diverse batch - there is no question about that.
However, I find that GOOD tech writers tend to be goal oriented AND good
problem solvers. However, MOST tech writers are neither. They are just
slugs that suck up useful air. But that is true of people in general. Most
people are slugs.

> The problem I have with this is that, at least in my generation (so
> maybe I'm out of touch), the people who went to engineering school were
> the kids who had torn down and rebuilt engines (or at least
> wristwatches) when they were in high school. Or they had built their own
> computers from Tandy kits. They were the ones who knew where to whack
> the recalcitrant vending machine to make it cough up a Coke.

THere are different classes of engineers. Some definately hearld from the
gear-head, whack-it until it obeys school of thought. However, I would
hazzard to guess these are less academic engineers and more the
IT/software junkie types.

I think over the past few decades, there is an emerging class of engineers
that are more cerebral and less animal. These engineers are not,
necessarily, less capable. They just use more passive methods to obtain
their results.

I can think of quite a few software and network engineers that would fall
into this category. They are smart people, they merely are more passive
and academic in their approach to problem solving.

Naturally - these are all just impressions. No facts backing up any of
this BS.

Andrew Plato

Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.

Announcing new options for IPCC 01, October 24-27 in Santa Fe,
New Mexico: attend the entire event or select a single day.
For details and online registration, visit

Your monthly sponsorship message here reaches more than
5000 technical writers, providing 2,500,000+ monthly impressions.
Contact Eric (ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com) for details and availability.

You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.


Re: Do'ers and Doubters (was observation about engineers): From: Dick Margulis

Previous by Author: Do'ers and Doubters (was observation about engineers)
Next by Author: Re: Do'ers and Doubters (was observation about engineers)
Previous by Thread: Re: Do'ers and Doubters (was observation about engineers)
Next by Thread: Re: Do'ers and Doubters (was observation about engineers)

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

Sponsored Ads