Re[2]: Enough said

[Carol Carmick <Carol_Carmick -at- BEAV -dot- INTERSOLV -dot- COM>]

     I don't really understand the strongly negative response to this
     thread.

     I think this discussion reveals some interesting things about
     technical communicators' attitudes toward their readers.  If we
     believe that understanding technology is a social obligation akin
     to driving a car safely, naturally we are offended by those who
     won't "play by the rules."  Even if we tone down the metaphor a
     bit and equate technical literacy with good table manners, it
     still enables those in the know to look down our noses at the
     bozos who are drinking out of the fingerbowls.

     As a technical communicator, I'm interested in developing a
     different metaphor for myself than driving instructor or Miss
     Manners.  I want to be aligned with my reader, not with the
     designers of the product (of whom I may nevertheless be one) or
     the community of experts.

     Specifically, I want my first thought always to be "What is my
     reader trying to _do_ here?" -- not "How does the program do
     this?" -- let alone "Why don't they already know this?" or "If
     they don't know this, they shouldn't be using my product at all."

     It's like the user is getting dressed, and I'm the valet who
     unobtrusively makes their hat appear just as they reach for it.
     Or something.

     I'm especially interested in the discussion of user-tolerant
     design, since I believe (as I have said before) that an ounce of
     design is worth a pound of documentation.

     By the way, I don't buy the "people will unsub if we fight too
     much" argument.  I'm new to this list, and lively discussion like
     this encourages me to stick around.

     Carol