Re: Do you equate engineers and programmers?

[mpriestley -at- VNET -dot- IBM -dot- COM]

>To further this end, they like to develop languages (perhaps even writing
>styles?) of their own. It's like having a secret code. This increases the
>chances that their power will be maintained, because others cannot easily
>understand what they're saying or writing.

To be fair to the engineers, I don't think the policy is necessarily
designed to exclude.  I think there are some people who do use "information
as power".  However, I think in most cases it's simply shorthand.  Usually
technical terminology is shorter and more exact than its "normal-language"
equivalents.  This is convenient for rapid-fire discussions between experts,
although it certainly does exclude non-experts.

Within IBM, there is an acronym for almost everything.  If I don't know
what one means, I ask.  The funny thing is, usually they can tell me
what it _means_, but they've forgotten what it stands for.

Most of the programmers I've worked with have been very patient and helpful.
They were clearly not being obscure for the sake of being obscure, they
were just using the most convenient language for the subject.  It's up to
me to translate that into the most convenient language for the reader.

Later,

Michael Priestley
mpriestley -at- vnet -dot- ibm -dot- com
Disclaimer: speaking on my own behalf, not anyone else's.