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: ADMIN: Being nice to each other From:Steve Arrants <stephena -at- COMPBEAR -dot- COM> Date:Fri, 7 Aug 1998 09:17:37 -0700
I didn't read the original as slamming individuals, as much as the tendency
on the list (well, all lists, really) to be the "first line" for some
questions that may be better answered elsewhere. The "LED" discussion, for
example, probably could have been answered by referring the member to a
style guide. I think some list members tend to use the list as a personal
assistant. That's quite all right, since some don't mind answering these
types of questions, or spending time discussing them. But some of us don't,
and that's legitimate too. One thing that is very helpful are good Subject
lines. I can tell quickly which messages I'm NOT interested in, and which
ones I might want to read. (Aside: I wish the RoboHelp list enforced
this...there seem to be more messages without Subjects as there are with
'em.)
I don't know why folks feel that they HAVE to read every message that comes
across on a mailing list. Read what you want and chuck what you think is
dreck.
-----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: Friday, August 07, 1998 8:57 AM
Subject: ADMIN: Being nice to each other
>Gang,
>
>An earlier posting lambasted the quality and topics
>covered on this list (based on four days experience
>with it). I took issue with the posting because
>I don't see any need to slam list members who
>have legitimate questions. If someone thinks that
>the comments on the list are ill-informed or
>not sophisticated enough, then that person is
>welcome to start new threads on different topics
>or ignore the other threads, but snide comments
>about list discussions revealing the need for
>certification are uncalled for and unnecessary.
>
>I've had a couple of off-line exchanges with the
>original poster, starting with a rules reminder,
>and moving on to explicitly asking this individual
>to agree to follow the rules. As a result of the
>exchanges with this poster, I've suspended his
>posting privileges.
>
>There's ample room on this list for open discussion
>of any tech writing related topics, and even for
>discussion of the quality of technical writing or of
>technical writers, but I expect that those discussions will
>be conducted in a professional manner and
>without slamming other list members.
>
>In brief, BE NICE.
>Eric
