RE: RE:classification -- was definition. . .

Subject: RE: RE:classification -- was definition. . .
From: "Leonard C. Porrello" <Leonard -dot- Porrello -at- SoleraTec -dot- com>
To: "Gene Kim-Eng" <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>, <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Mon, 5 May 2008 11:03:27 -0700

I'm confused. Are you saying that I was trying to "declassify" other
technical writers?

Leonard C. Porrello


-----Original Message-----
From: techwr-l-bounces+leonard -dot- porrello=soleratec -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
[mailto:techwr-l-bounces+leonard -dot- porrello=soleratec -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- c
om] On Behalf Of Gene Kim-Eng
Sent: Monday, May 05, 2008 10:51 AM
To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Subject: Re: RE:classification -- was definition. . .

No, it's decidedly capitalist in nature. You're a technical writer
if you can secure and hold employment under that job title, as
is anyone you hire under that job title who can handle the work
you assign. Technical writers attempting to "declassify" other
technical writers who are successfully making a living in the
profession based on their background, education, training,
type of documents they write, etc., just gives hiriing managers
something to laugh about at best, and at worst makes technical
writers appear to be petulant prima donnas who are afraid to face
competition or admit that there are forms of technical writing
that they are not qualified to perform.

Gene Kim-Eng


----- Original Message -----
From: "Leonard C. Porrello" <Leonard -dot- Porrello -at- SoleraTec -dot- com>
In short, the synthetic distinctions being used to this point in this
discussion arguably don't make much sense--except, perhaps, in terms of
Marxist literary criticism. And I don't think the Marxist approach is
the most cogent in this case.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.
http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList

True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com

---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/archive%40web.techwr-l.com


To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.


Follow-Ups:

References:
RE: Definition of Tech Writer, was STC is broken: From: Joe Armstrong
RE: Definition of Tech Writer, was STC is broken: From: Connie Giordano
RE:classification -- was definition. . .: From: David Hailey
Re: RE:classification -- was definition. . .: From: Gene Kim-Eng
RE: RE:classification -- was definition. . .: From: Leonard C. Porrello
Re: RE:classification -- was definition. . .: From: Gene Kim-Eng

Previous by Author: RE: RE:classification -- was definition. . .
Next by Author: RE: RE:classification -- was definition. . .
Previous by Thread: Re: RE:classification -- was definition. . .
Next by Thread: Re: RE:classification -- was definition. . .


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads