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.
The thread on Nostradamus, combined in my mind with the recent thread on
math education, presents some interesting thoughts related to our craft.
What the backers of Nostradamus (and Edgar Cayce) fail to note is that the
volumes about him on bookstore shelves represent tiny fractions of his total
output. I don't know exact numbers, but have gathered from several sources
over the years that N. wrote hundreds of volumes. Any of the excellent
writers on this list could write hundreds of volumes of far more specific
claims, and 400 years from now would have been right on at least 5% of them
(a liberal guesstimate of his bookstore output vs. his total output). Add in
less-specific verbiage and selective editing by people motivated to prove
their pre-existing views correct, and the percentage rises exceptionally.
Having trouble staying focused on tasks, I let this thought meander a bit
and came up with a few philosophical implications for me as a communicator.
I recognize the logical connection is loose in some cases <g>:
1. I must be careful not to deduce that our documents work for the customer
because I, my staff, and a couple of specially chosen reviewers say they do.
Truth arises by surveying the wide range of information, especially
information likely to disagree with our conclusions. In short, I must keep
asking a broad range of customers what my group can do to improve.
2. I tend to focus on helping customers find the information they need, but
context is important too. I have to bear in mind that people--on my staff or
in my customer's companies--do their work better when they understand the
implications of the overall information set.
3. Humans tend to look only at the information that interests them--even if
it is in their best interest to look at other parts. I must keep looking for
ways to persuade our readers to take in unpleasant or boring yet necessary
information.
4. The implications of probability are little understood by most people,
even otherwise educated people. That's why people gamble, believe ideas
contradicted by significant evidence, and keep trying to make software do
things it isn't designed to do. I add that last because people frustrate
themselves by ignoring that product design (and documentation) has to be
based on the ways the large majority of people are likely to use it. We
cannot cost-effectively--if at all--address every possible scenario.
On that note, as a former New Yorker I'll add my own word of thanks for the
support of the non-U.S. colleagues on this list, and try to get some work
done.
Best wishes to all,
Jim
Jim Morgan
Technical Communications Mgr.
PortalPlayer, Inc.
jim -dot- morgan -at- portalplayer -dot- com
425-825-2323
A landmark hotel, one of America's most beautiful cities, and
three and a half days of immersion in the state of the art:
IPCC 01, Oct. 24-27 in Santa Fe. http://ieeepcs.org/2001/
+++ Miramo -- Database/XML publishing automation. See us at +++
+++ Seybold SFO, Sept. 25-27, in the Adobe Partners Pavilion +++
+++ More info: http://www.axialinfo.comhttp://www.miramo.com +++
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
