Re: Re[2]: BC/AD vs BCE/CE (a rant)

Subject: Re: Re[2]: BC/AD vs BCE/CE (a rant)
From: Richard Yanowitz <ryanowit -at- NYCT -dot- NET>
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 1997 18:21:33 -0400

At 01:51 PM 10/24/97 -0500, Walker, Arlen P wrote:
>It's a misconception to believe the BC/AD dating is based upon
>religious belief. It's based upon a significant historical event.

With all due respect, this is quite a stretch.

But I don't think it's at all off-topic to see the our work in its
historical context. I would be dismayed to think of tech writers as
narrow, sterile, uncurious scribes bent over video terminals and wanting or
thriving on only minimal knowledge to compose material, whether the
knowledge is about the information we're conveying in a document or the
language we're using to convey that information.

We are what we remember.

Richard Yanowitz, NYC
mailto:ryanowitz -at- bigfoot -dot- com

Freelance writers (including tech writers): join the National Writers Union
for contract help, grievances, health benefits, lobbying, community....

For further information, e-mail me or contact the union directly:
web site:
mailto:nwu -at- nwu -dot- org

Posts: mailto:techwr-l -at- listserv -dot- okstate -dot- edu
Commands: mailto:listserv -at- listserv -dot- okstate -dot- edu (e.g. SIGNOFF TECHWR-L)
Archives:,, or
Subjects: JOB:, QUESTION:, SUMMARY:, ANNOUNCE:, or none of these.

Previous by Author: Re: BC/AD vs BCE/CE
Next by Author: Frame User's Network, NY Meeting
Previous by Thread: Re[2]: BC/AD vs BCE/CE (a rant)
Next by Thread: Windows NT versus Windows 95

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

Sponsored Ads