Re: TECHWRLing vs. techwriting

[Eisbruchs -at- aol -dot- com]

I want to express appreciation to
Keith and everyone else who has made an
effort to keep their negative postings to a minimum.
I joined this list in 2003 and have learned a 
lot from it.   
- Emily Eisbruch


Subject: Re: TECHWRLing vs. techwriting
From: kcronin -at- daleen -dot- com
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 08:56:19 -0700

> Gawd...I was also wondering about the same thing. I
> spend almost upto 2 hrs. every morning just reading
> and replying on this list.
> 
> I would also like to know how do the regulars manage
> both i.e. TECHWRLing and techwriting????

2 hours? Wow. I only spend a few minutes a day on this list.
First of all, I don't receive posts via e-mail. That's way too much work.
I access TECHWR-L a few times a day using the Web interface, which groups posts by thread.

http://lists.raycomm.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=techwr-l

>From this view, I decide which posts to read, based on the subject line
and/or the author. There are a few members whose posts I always read, and a few whom I tend to ignore, based on previous posts.

I've cut my own posting down significantly, by trying not to rehash things
that are well covered in the archives, and by trying to make only positive
posts. I still reserve the right to be a smartass, but try to avoid
posting messages that are nothing but potshots. I'll admit, embracing this
philosophy caused my post count to drop significantly, which tells me I
was a lot more aggressive/argumentative in the past. And I don't claim a
100% success ratio at this approach. But overall, I'm now a softer,
gentler Keith. If you don't like it, I'll kick your-- Oops. Sorry 'bout
that. Old habits die hard.

But really, 2 hours seems a bit much. And probably not the best thing to advertise to your employer on this highly Googleable site.

Keith Cronin
who was working in his mind while writing this - honest.