Re: Not Sure

Subject: Re: Not Sure
From: Dick Margulis <margulis -at- fiam -dot- net>
To: Guy McDonald <gmcdonald -at- mcdts -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 10:51:18 -0400

Guy McDonald wrote:

Jeanne Keuma said ...

I don't know anyone who would WANT to call themselves "communication
generalists"-- it's probably too generic and says nothing about any
technical writing/editing experience... Sounds like a PR person... But
perhaps some firms use that term for their tech comm folks...

Dick Margulis said ..

Being a generalist isn't a bad thing, and thinking of oneself as a

generalist does not constitute self-deprecation. A [Generalist] means
knowing enough about a wide variety of things to be effective in novel

This is odd ... I disagree with Dick Margulis! Although Dick's closing
statement about a "generalist" not being a good fit for every application is
a no-brainer. (applicant has never been exposed to the basic concepts
involved in writing software user manuals, maybe she's a bit _too_ much of a


First of all, you are NOT allowed to disagree with me. Nobody is allowed to disagree with me. Ever. ... Damn! When is that prescription refill going to get here?!?

Second, I really don't think we're disagreeing. I was responding to Jeanne's generalized derogation of generalists, not to Tamara's concern. I think Tamara is right to be sensitive to the vibrations in her antennae, and more investgation/sharper interviewing may be needed. But I just didn't want Jeanne's remarks to go unchallenged.


[This E-mail scanned for viruses at]


RE: Not Sure: From: Guy McDonald

Previous by Author: Re: Not Sure
Next by Author: Re: Not Sure
Previous by Thread: RE: Not Sure
Next by Thread: RE: Not Sure

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads