Re: STC blackmail? (Was: Humor... sort of)

[Andrew Plato <intrepid_es -at- yahoo -dot- com>]

"Hart, Geoff" wrote...

> Andrew Plato reports: <<I learned long ago that fighting STC was a fruitless
> and unrewarding endeavor. STC doesn't want to change and it will go to great
> lengths to stop any change.>>
> 
> While there's some justice to that statement (any large organisation tends
> towards the conservative), your overall statement is exaggerated to a
> ridiculous extent. First, STC has made some major changes over the past
> several years in response to requests from members. Second, your point about
> actively suppressing change is wholly unsubstantiated and should be formally
> withdrawn--one techwhirler who is also an STC member and who was present at
> your meeting formally contradicted your claims.

The person who "formally contradicted" my claims attended ONE of our meetings.
And I am reasonably certain that she was not present at the meeting where the
incident I mentioned arose. Therefore, she is not really qualified to refute or
substantiate my claims. 

Furthermore, I never said they were "actively suppressing" I said that
"outright discourages."  Discouraging people from doing something and
suppressing activity are two very different things. I think my use of the word
"discouraging" was appropriate. I do believe that STC discourages writers,
either overtly or passively, from improving their technical skills. 

> If you've got evidence that this sort of thing happens, you've got grounds
> for a court case. This kind of behavior at the organizational level strikes
> me as highly unlikely. I'd certainly accept the hypothesis that you
> alienated some individuals (you're hardly the soul of tact when it comes to
> STC as any scan of the archives will reveal) and they told some friends to
> stay away, but suggesting that this was any kind of organized conspiracy is
> questionable. It's also probably libelous, and you should know better than
> to make such statements in a public forum.

Yes, I should know better then to EVER allow anybody on TECHWR-L any insight
into my real life. I told Enla this when she was talking about her company
issues on the list. I obviously did not follow my own advice. You may now punch
me in the vital organ of your choice. (Elna can punch me twice!)

As much as I want to believe there is some "organized conspiracy" I am smarter
than that Geoff. STC is just a big moving slug that, like all large heavy
objects in the universe has a tendency to continue moving in the direction it
is pushed. This includes me. 

There is no reason to ratchet up the heat on this issue and make it into
something it is not. In all fairness, the person who said this really was not
trying to suppress anything. I think she was honestly trying to figure out if
the type of training we were doing was valuable. My anger was that she did this
in front of the group and...purposefully or not...discouraged a fair number of
people from attending. Was it some conspiracy - no. It was however, part of a
greater problem. She (and the people she had spoken to) did not see technical
education as important to being a technical writer. 

Furthermore, how would you like it if I showed up to a meeting you were hosting
and belted out: "This is stupid, I've talked to tons of people who think what
you're doing is worthless."  You would be angry and upset with me (and
rightfully so). Any my attitude may make you think about why I said that. 

Also, let's drop the legal, court case talk. Nobody is suing anybody. We're
having a friendly, albeit heated discussion about the merits of STC. Let's keep
it friendly and keep our lawyers holstered. 


> Of course, as a non-member, you're obviously not absorbing the same
> subliminal brainwashing I've absorbed while reading their publications, and
> thus, you're clearly seeing things without rose-tinted spectacles. Or
> perhaps you're just so completely out of touch with STC that you really have
> no clear idea what you're talking about. Pick the theory that suits you.

I am perfectly willing to accept the "you're out of touch Andrew" label. But I
can read and I can draw conclusions. I read a brochure that lists 250 some
seminars and not a single one of them covers a technically oriented topic. Then
I look at the name of the organization "Society of Technical Communicators" and
my naturally analytical brain says "this isn't right." How can an organization
with the word technical in its very name not have technical topics at their
yearly convention. 

Make what you will out of that observation. Do what you will with that
information. Become personally and deeply offended by that observation. But
don't tell me my observations are flawed merely because I didn't attend last
week's pot luck STC luncheon at the downtown Days Inn.

Andrew Plato 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Are you using Doc-to-Help or ForeHelp? Switch to RoboHelp for Word for $249
or to RoboHelp Office for only $499. Get the PC Magazine five-star rated
Help authoring tool for less! Go to http://www.ehelp.com/techwr

Free copy of ARTS PDF Tools when you register for the PDF
Conference by April 30. Leading-Edge Practices for Enterprise
& Government, June 3-5, Bethesda,MD. www.PDFConference.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.