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.
I guess we'll never enjoy each other's company then.
> There's jumping through hoops, and there's being
> flexible and cooperative.
Exactly. Why can't this be a two way street?
> I'm not sure what areas of tech writing you've
> worked in, but in software
> houses, change is the rule. Which means ADAPTING
> when faced with the
> unexpected. Simply facing each new change with a
> snappy "Homey don't play
> dat" is NOT a constructive approach, IMO.
Please don't picture me as the toddler who refuses to
open his mouth at dinner. I'm a rather flexible person
(and yes, I've been in the software field for many
years, mostly in small companies where no change is
cause for worry).
Why is "being flexible" always interpreted as "do what
you're told and don't make waves"? I'm very curious.
If you train your child to eat at 8am, 12pm, and 5pm,
to do homework with the TV off at 6pm, and to be in
bed at 8pm, is that child flexible, just because the
child allowed you to impose this regiment upon him or
her? No, that child is not flexible. Likewise, if you
have a different schedule every single day, going so
much as to remove items and add others, is that child
flexible? No, that child is not flexible. That child
is unstructured, but not flexible, as the child
follows the chaos.
> And I'm not offended by a writing test. Write
> something about a specific
> topic within a specified time range? That's not just
> a test, it's a
> microcosm of the job itself. No problem; that's what
> I DO. But that's
> another rant...
Right. That's what you do. So why test it for
testing's sake? Would you administer a writing test to
someone with 20 years' technical writing? Would you
administer a table saw test to a person who's been
making dining room sets for 20 years? There's a point
where the test is moot. 20 years is long past that
point. I think 5 is a good number. I like the way it's
rigid, yet bending at just the right point.
> I'd like you to consider the idea that it's not all
> about each job being
> exactly what WE want it to be. That's why they give
> us MONEY to do this stuff.
Let me also introduce the idea that it's not always
about the money. After all, it's 1/3 (or more) of our
weekdays. If I was only interested in the money, I
could find other things to do that would earn me a
hell of a lot more than technical writing ever could.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find a job, post your resume. http://careers.yahoo.com
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Be a published author! iUniverse gives you: a high-quality paperback, a
custom cover design, and distribution to 25,00 retailers. Join our almost
10,000 published authors today. http://www.iuniverse.com/publish/default.asp
Your monthly sponsorship message here reaches more than
5000 technical writers, providing 2,500,000+ monthly impressions.
Contact Eric (ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com) for details and availability.
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
