Re: Re[4]: Certification

Subject: Re: Re[4]: Certification
From: "Scott, Vester" <vscott -at- RPSPO1 -dot- ATLANTAGA -dot- ATTGIS -dot- COM>
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 1995 13:32:00 PDT

Arlen -

I enjoy the fact that you are a thoughtful person, and not afraid to speak
your mind.

However . . .

My entire statement that you misquoted is shown below, with the words you
selectively truncated shown in all caps.

FURTHER TO THAT: IN MY EXPERIENCE, MANY (BUT CERTAINLY NOT ALL) Technical
"writers" who are not degreed in the profession, and/or who simply drifted
into it from some other profession, are lousy writers who do not
understand the basic precepts of grammer, syntax, punctuation, style . .
.you name
it.

I say your truncation DOES change the meaning to support your subsequent
statements. But enough of that. Can you tell me, specifically, what part of
the above statement is untrue?

For the record . . .

I absolutely do not believe that TW certification should be mandatory. I
would be one of the first to rise up against such a notion.

I DO firmly believe that certification should be an option available to tech
writers who are interested in demonstrating to naive prospective employers
that a board of their peers feels that they can cut the mustard. Many, if
not most, employers are helpless in this arena; their HR department doesn't
have a clue, and the TW department manager is frequently much more of a
manager than a tech writing expert. Bad writing screws the user first.
Laissez-faire doesn't ripple down to punish the employer, who then fires the
writer, etc., for a long time.

A perenial gripe of tech writers throughout industry is the lack of respect
shown to TW as a profession. We talk glibly to each other about our dreams
and achievements at local, regional, and national conventions, yet many
prospective employers continue to view us as flunkies -- a necessary evil
that sucks up overhead money with no visible evidence of ROI. Sometimes the
employers are are right. A properly designed and administered certification
program can change that.

I hate threads that drag on long after they are worn out, but I think
professional credibility is important to us. If people start talking about
it, maybe it will happen. If certification isn't the answer, perhaps will
suggest the RIGHT answer.

Regards,

-Vester

----------
From: Arlen.P.Walker
To: Multiple recipients of list TECHWR-L
Subject: Re[4]: Certification
Date: Thursday, July 13, 1995 8:29AM

The only thing you have said here that I disagree with is that, in
omitting part of my statement you effectively misquoted me in the
negative.

As far as I can tell, the only thing I left out of your quote was the word
"many" which was in the line or two before where I started my quote.
Including
that word wouldn't have changed anything I wrote. If you feel I did you an
injustice by leaving that word out of the quote, I apologize. The only
reason
I did was sheer convenience on my part -- it's easier to delete complete
lines
than partial ones.
(etc.)


Previous by Author: [no subject]
Next by Author: Re: Vester's Certification
Previous by Thread: Re: Certification
Next by Thread: Re[6]: Certification


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads