TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: STC SIGs - scam or resource? From:bbatorsk -at- admin -dot- nj -dot- devry -dot- edu To:<techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Mon, 31 Jan 2000 09:34:12 -0500
Dan Roberts writes:
>the I-who-subscribes-to-a-SIG is now a client of the group of folks who have
>committed their time, energy, and resources.
Reject the premise, reject the argument. I do. Organizational
responsibilities, and efforts, cannot be reduced to the client/vendor
model, for me at least. Why can't we question that model when misapplied,
call that a scam, since IMHO it is one of the oldest, snake-oil scams when
misapplied? Or, are only good deeds suspect? Remember, business
(including client/vendor based business) in the US plans, at best, only
three years ahead, often only one year ahead. What kind of a bottom line
is that even for careerists, much less for a cooperative professional
society? No. Vendor/client doesn't work for me here.
I'm afraid I haven't "been there" with STC, so I don't know, but I have
come to expect cynicism from people who say they have "been there" for any
voluntary effort, political or social. I love cynics, but I wouldn't have
them as motivational speakers for a voluntary organization, maybe for a
client/vendor scam, but not for a cooperative, professional organization.
