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:Oh, no - not another learning experience!! From:Susan Hogarth <hogarth -at- gmail -dot- com> To:Techwr-l <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com> Date:Tue, 30 Jun 2009 03:24:40 -0400
(saw the subject line on a bumper strip - loved it).
I'm having a bit of a dispute with a fellow in an org to which I
belong (political party) about some Bylaws wording. I'd like either to
have my view supported, or to learn I'm wrong so have already gotten
my 'learn something new every day' so early in the morning :)
In the following dialogue, party = generic political party, and Party
= THE Party. I know that's obvious, but I just wanted to be clear.
Here's the story - he wrote:
>>> I would favor amending 8.4, to strike the word "sustaining" and leaving the
>>> rest (So it would read, "A National Committee member shall be a member of
>>> the Party, and shall not be the candidate of any party except the Party or
>>> an affiliate."). (Technically, it should read "any other political party",
>>> which only illustrates the need for a real Style Committee...)
I replied:
>> I disagree, Mike, if I understand what you're suggesting. Do you mean
>> change it to this?:
>>
>> "A National Committee member shall be a member of the Party, and shall
>> not be the candidate of any other political party except the Party or
>> an affiliate."
>>
>> If so, I think 'other' actually confuses rather than clarifies, since
>> 'party' is followed by 'except'. 'Except' already qualifies 'party',
>> and adding 'other' is at best redundant and possibly confusing.
To which he somewhat patronizingly replied:
> As for the "any other party" part, the difference is between the
> non-capitalized "party" as in another political party, versus the
> capitalized (and defined in the Bylaws) "Party" as being distinct from
> each other. It's not confusing at all if you follow the context correctly.
Your verdict, Members of the Jury?
--
Susan Hogarth
"Next to being shot at and missed, nothing is really quite as
satisfying as an income tax refund.” — F. J. Raymond http://www.colliething.com/
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Free Software Documentation Project Web Cast: Covers developing Table of
Contents, Context IDs, and Index, as well as Doc-To-Help
2009 tips, tricks, and best practices. http://www.doctohelp.com/SuperPages/Webcasts/
Help & Manual 5: The complete help authoring tool for individual
authors and teams. Professional power, intuitive interface. Write
once, publish to 8 formats. Multi-user authoring and version control! http://www.helpandmanual.com/
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-