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.
Eric - I do agree with many of your points here - there is a lot of
ego-wagging that goes on. And I often just want to send that unsubscribe
message so I don't have to read reiterations of the same dead-horse ideas.
BUT - as a newbie to this list myself, I am very uncomfortable with the idea
that any posting I place here will be deemed inappropriate to someone, and
therefore fodder for your posting scenario. I guess I would just like to
see a community sharing ideas with respect, a little humility, a sense of
humor, and willingness to see the other side of an issue. But this scenario
you just put up makes me very reluctant to get involved.
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric J. Ray <ejray -at- RAYCOMM -dot- COM>
To: TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU <TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU>
Date: Wednesday, December 17, 1997 12:16 PM
Subject: ADMIN: TECHWR-L Scenario Reminder
>THE INAPPROPRIATE POSTING SCENARIO
>Last updated 3/15/97.
>
> THE SCENARIO
> You are in a large lecture hall full of people in your profession.
> Included in the audience are students, educators, professionals.
> You cannot make out their faces, but they could reasonably
> include your employers or potential employers, your coworkers,
> and the ever-present violently obsessive technical writing
> groupies.
>
> Most of the audience members sit quietly as one member at a time
> gets up, walks to the podium, and shares information or advice or
> asks questions. Some of it is rich and detailed, some cursory but
> helpful, some trivial but relevant in a roundabout way. Somewhere
> in this stream of information, someone expresses an opinion or
> gives a piece of advice that you feel obligated to respond to.
>
> You get out of your seat and walk to the front of the room,
> everyone's eyes upon you. ...
>
> (Listowner's note: At this point, the paths may diverge.
> Some of the following unfortunate cases have been played
> out over the past few years.)
>
> A) You approach the podium, clear your throat, and say "Me,
> too." You are greeted with a combination of quizzical,
> patronizing smirks and incredulous silence.
>
> B) You relate that really good joke about Microsoft and operating
> systems that you overheard at the restaurant last night. Some
> laugh. Some wonder why you just now heard it. Many wonder why
> you'd use their chance to discuss technical communication to
> tell a old joke.
>
> C) You take your turn at the microphone to clarify a point. One
> of the previous speakers had mentioned, in the context of
> developing and using context-sensitive, interactive help files,
> that they used MS Word v3.0. Obviously, that's incorrect, therefore
> you clarify that they MUST have used a different version because
> that one didn't even exist. Not only that, but the incompetence
> of anyone who could make such a mistake is certainly astounding.
> It only takes you about 10 minutes to impress upon everyone that
> you know far better than the speaker what versions of Word exist.
> (You don't make any points about the issue at hand, but your
> audience has already made their assumptions about your knowledge
> in that area.)
>
> D) "Does anyone know how much the cheapest Internet service provider
> in Kansas costs?"
>
> E) You replay the entire videotape of the MS Word v3.0 speaker,
> including the introduction, the walk to the podium, and the walk
> back to a seat. The quality isn't all that hot, but it's important
> to make sure everyone knows the context in which you speak. 12
> minutes later, you point out that there is in fact a version of
> MS Word v3.0 and you had used it once, briefly, but didn't like
> it much and would always choose Frame. Furthermore, anyone who
> uses any version of Word is a certifiable idiot and if your company
> or clients require Word, you should quit and find a real company.
> You return to your seat satisfied about your demonstrated TW
> proficiency and wonder about the copy of "How to Win Friends and
> Influence People" that ended up on your chair. (Thanks to Jim Barton
> for the initial suggestion and Arlen Walker for the quibble.)
>
> F) You take your chance at the podium to publicly mock the
> pronunciation and diction of the three speakers before you, not to
> mention their poor spelling on overheads. As you return to your
> seat, someone passes you a note pointing out that one of the three
> is hard of hearing, one is not a native speaker of English, and
> that many people in the world don't see a problem with spelling
> "defense" as "defence". Whoops! Oh, well, you think, they'll get
> over it.
>
> G) You walk up to the podium and say "I'm glad you all
> finally stopped talking about that subject, because you were wasting
> everyone's time. I'm so relieved we're not discussing it any more."
> (Thanks to Tracy Boyington for this one.)
>
> H) You reach the microphone and say the exact same thing that all 8
> people before you have said because you didn't bother to listen to
> them. (Thanks to Chris Boehm.)
>
> I) You piously denounce the majority of subjects that have
> been discussed thus far as irrelevant to the original
> scope of the conference, berate the conference organizers
> for allowing such irrelevancies to be introduced into the
> dialogue, and announce that you will leave the auditorium
> if discussion of such issues continues.
>
> J) You complain that the seminar does not provide a wide enough
> scope for discussion of your particular interests (which may
> be of only cursory interest to a minority of people attending
> the conference), accuse the conference organizers of promoting
> censorship, and ask if anyone knows of another conference
> organized by nonfacists. (Thanks to Bill Burns for these last 2.)
>
> As you walk back to your seat, you try to make out the faces around you.
> (Thanks to Lisa Higgins for the original scenario)
>
>
>
>
>**************************************************
>Eric J. Ray ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com
>TECHWR-L Listowner http://www.raycomm.com/
>
>http://www.documentation.com/, or http://www.dejanews.com/
>
>
