Re: "Structured writing = commodified writing"

Subject: Re: "Structured writing = commodified writing"
From: Gene Kim-Eng <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>
To: Keith Hood <bus -dot- write -at- gmail -dot- com>, Debra Kahn <kahndebra -at- gmail -dot- com>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 13:32:50 -0700

The object of this story is, do not create false expectations by allowing your unfinished work to be viewed. Turn the links on only when there is something for them to link to.

Gene Kim-Eng

On 5/22/2014 1:00 PM, Keith Hood wrote:

At the yearly evaluations, after months of working 70-hour weeks, I was
denied a bonus because I had too many bugs reported against my work.

Doc-To-Help 2014 v1 now available. SharePoint 2013 support, NetHelp enhancements, and more. Read all about it.

Learn more:


You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.

Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our online magazine at

Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our public email archives @


"Structured writing = commodified writing": From: Cardimon, Craig
Re: "Structured writing = commodified writing": From: Keith Hood
Re: "Structured writing = commodified writing": From: Debra Kahn
Re: "Structured writing = commodified writing": From: Keith Hood

Previous by Author: Re: Structured writing = commodified writing
Next by Author: Re: Does your organization mark PDF user guides as confidential?
Previous by Thread: Re: "Structured writing = commodified writing"
Next by Thread: Re: "Structured writing = commodified writing"

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

Sponsored Ads