Re: Just FYI

Subject: Re: Just FYI
From: Iain Harrison <iharrison -at- SCT -dot- CO -dot- UK>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 09:52:07 GMT

I'm getting increasingly frustrated by the way this list runs too.
The definition of what is on-topic and off-topic seems very strange
to me.

Long discussions about some chapter of the STC in a state six
thousand miles away are quite acceptable, it seems, though I can see
little interest or benefit to those who don't live in that state.

Queries about getting payment from a debtor are acceptable, it
seems, although this is no more a particular problem for tech
writers than for car mechanics.

Definitions of an intranet are acceptable, it seems, although it is
clear that there is no specific definition of an intranet, and it
has no particular relevance to tech writing.

Of course, a problem with a feature in Word which is particularly a
bugbear for tech writers (and probably isn't used by anyone else) is
unacceptable.

These are not isolated examples.

Get real. Some people actually write for a living, and the tools
they use are important to them. Where else would you actually find
people who are knowledgeable about workarounds for Word's Master/sub
document deficiencies? You won't find them on word mailing lists or
conferencing systems. Word users don't normally need to use that
feature, so they avoid it.

I don't usually complain about what I consider to be off-topic
posts. I can look at the headers and not read them. Why can't other
people do the same?

Are we returning to the era of the witchhunt? Is Senator McCarthy
back with us?

Iain


Previous by Author: Re: Word Masterdoc problems: 6/7?
Next by Author: Re[2]: Client won't pay
Previous by Thread: Re: Just FYI
Next by Thread: Re: Just FYI


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads