NON-DELIVERY of: Re: What to call us

[Lotus -dot- M -dot- a -dot- i -dot- l -dot- Exchange -at- TESSPO-VA -dot- SMTRW -dot- LANGATE -dot- SPRINT -dot- COM]

--aLTHpH4ppGegusiuCh57sAo4dETlhYRb
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"


                           Delivery Failure Report

                               Your document:
                             Re: What to call us
                         could not be delivered to:
                   Ronni Perry -at- CRWMS at DL-Notes -at- DL_CCMAIL
                                  because:
                   MailEx0010: cc:Mail user name too long.
                                Routing path:
                           DLLN2,DLLN2,DLLN2,DLLN2


                          ________________________




--aLTHpH4ppGegusiuCh57sAo4dETlhYRb
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

RFC-822-Headers:
Comments: To: TECHWR-L -at- VM1 -dot- ucc -dot- okstate -dot- edu

--aLTHpH4ppGegusiuCh57sAo4dETlhYRb
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Marta wrote:
<snip>

>While I don't have any objection to my peers/colleagues adopting other
>titles for the same work I do, I don't know who it *really* impresses.  I
>know that when I meet a Sanitation Engineer, I'm dealing with a garbage
man >with a vocabulary (or a thesaurus).

<snippity snip>

>We say what we *are* (technical writers, technical communicators, document
>engineers, information engineers, etc.), when asked what we do, when we
>should be telling people what we *do*.

Thanks for your insightful and sensible post. Of course we should be doing
as you suggest because, existentialist echoes aside, we are what we do.
steve wax                                 stevewx -at- eskimo -dot- com
-------------------------------------------------------------
After the final no there comes a yes
and on that yes the future world depends.  --Wallace Stevens

--aLTHpH4ppGegusiuCh57sAo4dETlhYRb--