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.
Subject:Re: FYI: Re: Re. Certification rebuttal/follow-on From:Win Day <winday -at- IDIRECT -dot- COM> Date:Wed, 3 Jan 1996 10:05:21 -0500
At 06:22 AM 1/3/96 -0800, Sue Ellen Adkins wrote:
>Geoff Hart wrote:
>> Being evaluated on the basis of my work is much
>> more attractive to me than whether I was able
>> to complete a two-hour test well.
>I agree with you on being judged by our work rather than
>on a test. However, there is a small group of writers
>who, because of their subjects or customers, cannot
>legally provide samples of their products. I'm referring
>to proposals and manuals written for the government.
I don't write for the government. But most of what I write is proprietary,
and I cannot allow it to be viewed by third parties. I signed all sorts of
secrecy agreements for my current client and for most of my previous
clients, and I can't violate those agreements.
How could I get certified on the basis of what I write, if I can't allow
anyone to review it?
Win
---------------
Win Day
Technical Writer/Editor
Email: winday -at- idirect -dot- com
