Re: Re(4): Slow Tech Writers

[letoured -at- together -dot- net]

In <20020710165447 -dot- 22943 -at- post -dot- strato -dot- de>, on 07/10/02
   at 06:54 PM, Jan Henning <henning -at- r-l -dot- de> said:

>Dear letoured

>>>There are slower writers and faster writers. A slower writer going slow is
>>>most likely slower than a faster writer going slow, so the distinction even
>>>applies to your 'slow, methodical' projects.
>>
>>Nonsense. -- It doesn't matter how long someone takes. What matters is the
>>accuracy, the rework that is avoided, and how well it works for the customer.

>Sorry to have to disagree, but it matters how long it takes to write
>documentation. Even where the quality is very important, there is an amount
>of time, large though it may be, that is longer acceptable.

Disagree all you want.  You are in the software writing business. They are
market driven. Other industries have quality, integrity, and professional
concerns.

Furthermore, I didn't say the time didn't matter I said it takes longer to do
it right -- and its required and placed higher on the scale of what is
important.  If you followed my other posts you have seen that the customers
expect and demand it to be right too.


>>>Also note that "slow" and "methodical" aren't synonymous. [...]
>>
>>They are not synonymous in your view because of what?

>Are you seriously asking that? You might find the answer in a dictionary, but
>here is how I understand the terms:

>- Slow: Taking a long time to do something

How about if "slow" means it takes a long time to do it right -- does that
change the picture or the word for you?


>- Methodical: Rigorously following a method in doing something

>It follows that there may be slow, unmethodical work as well as fast,
>methodical work.

And your point is what?  Not everyone is as market driven and working on
things as uncomplicated as software user manuals.


>>Are you equaling slow
>>with lazy or bad or what?  I never said anything resembling that. Slow can
>>also mean requiring a long time. Check your dictionary.

>I'm wasn't equating slow with anything besides than "taking a long time". In
>particular, I pointed out that slow cannot be equated with methodical.

Actually, you're pole vaulting over a mouse.

>>>Finally, it is a cliché to assume that slower writers make fewer
>errors. This
>>>is certainly not what I have experienced. (If anything, I would say that
>>>faster writers tend to have a better grasp of the subject matter, but I
>don't
>>>see a hard correlation between the two.)
>>
>>Really?  Maybe you aren't very experienced, or have not worked with
>>experienced writers.

>I did not talk about what I _didn't_ experience but about what I _did_
>experience. So your personal attack is not only bad style and uncalled for,
>it is also illogical in the context.

Its not illogical at all. If you had ever worked on projects that had to be
done right, you would understand.


>>What you people seem to be doing is equating "slow" with a slow writer and
>>making that a bad writer.  -- I never said that. Equate slow with
>careful, and
>>you might see the difference.

>I don't do htat. I merely pointed out that it is wrong to automatically
>equate slow with careful as you seem to have done. If you did not mean to do
>so, there does not seem to be an argument.

You're pole vaulting over a mouse. Slow is careful in some industries. You and
others here don't seem to be interested in getting that.


-----------------------------------------------------------
letoured -at- together -dot- net
-----------------------------------------------------------



^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Save $600: Create great-looking Help files and software demos with
RoboHelp Deluxe. Get RoboHelp and RoboDemo - our new demo software - for one
low price. OR Save $100 on RoboHelp Office in June with our mail-in rebate.
Go to http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l

  Your monthly sponsorship message here reaches more than
  5000 technical writers, providing 2,500,000+ monthly impressions.
  Contact Eric (ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com) for details and availability.

---
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.