Re: Re(2): Slow Tech Writers

Subject: Re: Re(2): Slow Tech Writers
From: letoured -at- together -dot- net
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2002 13:23:22 -0400

In <20020709145333 -dot- 7787 -at- post -dot- strato -dot- de>, on 07/09/02
at 04:53 PM, Jan Henning <henning -at- r-l -dot- de> said:

>>the fact is that there is only one way to
>>write certain documents -- and that is to be slow and methodical

>I'd like to expand on Dick's comment a bit: As he said, you are really
>describing tasks, not writers.

No, I am talking about writers and writing.

>There are slower writers and faster writers. A slower writer going slow is
>most likely slower than a faster writer going slow, so the distinction even
>applies to your 'slow, methodical' projects.

Nonsense. -- It doesn't matter how long someone takes. What matters is the
accuracy, the rework that is avoided, and how well it works for the customer.

>Also note that "slow" and "methodical" aren't synonymous. Fast writers can
>work methodically and slow ones can be all over the place. The projects you
>describe really call for methodical writing, not slow writing (with
>'methodical' having priority over 'fast' whenever there is a conflict).

They are not synonymous in your view because of what? Are you equaling slow
with lazy or bad or what? I never said anything resembling that. Slow can
also mean requiring a long time. Check your dictionary.

>Finally, it is a cliché to assume that slower writers make fewer errors. This
>is certainly not what I have experienced. (If anything, I would say that
>faster writers tend to have a better grasp of the subject matter, but I don't
>see a hard correlation between the two.)

Really? Maybe you aren't very experienced, or have not worked with
experienced writers.

What you people seem to be doing is equating "slow" with a slow writer and
making that a bad writer. -- I never said that. Equate slow with careful, and
you might see the difference.

Furthermore, its been my experience (25 years now) that fast writers are
either very, very knowledgeable in the subject, or its not very complex and
requires little original writing -- or most often, they are doing trash work!
In spite of what they may think.

Have I seen exceptions to that? Sure. But you know what -- I don't recall
ever meeting anyone who was fast and good, talking about others as lesser
writers -- because the knew that everybody starts somewhere, everybody learns
the art at a different pace, everybody excels in someway -- or they will with
a supervisor and writing team that mentors each other. And everyone does have
something to learn.

letoured -at- together -dot- net

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.
Save $600: Create great-looking Help files and software demos with
RoboHelp Deluxe. Get RoboHelp and RoboDemo - our new demo software - for one
low price. OR Save $100 on RoboHelp Office in June with our mail-in rebate.
Go to
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(2): Slow Tech Writers: From: Jan Henning

Previous by Author: Re: Anyone had experience writing laboratory analytical procedures?
Next by Author: RE: Slow Tech Writers (offshoot of "Looking for advice -- up to t he j ob?")
Previous by Thread: Re(2): Slow Tech Writers
Next by Thread: Re(4): Slow Tech Writers

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

Sponsored Ads