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: (no subject heading)/Mike & Sherri From:Joanna Sheldon <cjs10 -at- CORNELL -dot- EDU> Date:Fri, 4 Oct 1996 10:18:55 -0400
Mike --
>I'm with Sherri on this one - what exactly are we supposed to talk about on
this list?
>More and more often it seems as if, as soon as someone starts to talk about
use of language (which is, after all, the main tool of our trade, over and
above FrameMaker or Word) a couple of cries come in demanding that we stop
discussing the matter at hand immediately. More bizarrely, these cries are
normally justified on the grounds that "this is a list for TECHNICAL
WRITERS". We're then asked (always politely) to keep quiet unless we are
discussing matters which are relevant to the list.
I doubt Sherri is with *you* on this, although I could be wrong. I think
she's disgusted with the fact that we are arguing over whether it makes
sense to talk about grammar and usage on this list.
She's responding to MY post (subject line: Writing vs. ??? TECHNICAL
writing). And I think she thinks I'm wasting her time. Because she
neglected to paste my words as a quotation it looks as though they are her
words.
My "thanks Eric" was sarcastic! And I am highly annoyed that Sherri should
have quoted just enough so that it was not obvious.
Here's the beginning of my post, again.
>I responded at some length to a question about the use of "since" versus
>"because" and "which" versus "that".
>Sanford Carr's response was:
>>>>PLEASE!
>>>>
>>>>TECHNICAL writing. Not grammar, not software, not ...
>>>>
>>>>Sanford
>>>
>And I said:
>>>Yes, of course, Sanford. Good grammar and a solid knowledge of accepted
>>>usage has nothing to do with good writing, I forgot.
>...after which Eric J.Ray pointed out:
>>I think his point was TECHNICAL writing.
>>
>>My previous comments about appropriate topics still stand.
>>
>>I'll be happy to send you a copy of the what to
>>post/what not to post message if you'd like.
>>
>>Eric
>>
>Thanks, Eric.
>Techwhirlers? Are we to believe what a couple of techwriters and our list
>owner are telling us, either directly or indirectly -- that the question of
>whether or not the word "since" is acceptable in technical writing is not an
>appropriate topic for discussion among techwriters? That the question of
>_what makes good writing_ has nothing to do with _what makes good TECHNICAL
>writing_?
...and I went on with some warmth at some length. If you erased my post by
accident and want to see the whole thing I'll send it to you privately.
I am entirely in sympathy with you over the issue of the discussion of
salaries.
