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: The Holy Wars -- LAME! From:"Wing, Michael J" <mjwing -at- INGR -dot- COM> Date:Thu, 8 Jan 1998 13:28:10 -0600
I agree and disagree with points in this thread. The things I agree
with are that Writers should be flexible in their tools and not whole
devoted to one and only one word processor. I also agree that
everyone's preferences should be evaluated and that a selection should
be made as soon as practical.
I also feel that the tool should be selected for the job. If after
evaluating the arguments, word processor A is deemed the most prudent
choice, then I agree that management should put the foot down and say,
"For this job we have selected Word Processor A". "The reasons are as
follows . . . ". I don't agree with, "This is the only tool that we
will ever use".
I will admit that there are some tools I won't work with unless my job
depended on it. (There is a particular in-house SGML tool that makes
me shudder upon mere mention of its name). However, if word processor A
and word processor B both due the job, I don't get "loaded for bear" if
either is selected for the job.
As a full-time employee, it would definitely enrage me to have a
contractor go to management to have his/her personal preference foisted
upon everyone without due process or the chance to make my case. Maybe,
it's the situation in which I have worked with or worked as a
contractor. In my experience, the contractor is an interloper. They
are hired to assist the full-time employee because the need is short
term or specialized skills are required.
When I was a contractor, I never tried to dictate what is and is not to
be used. I have suggested and have demonstrated why and what I use, but
have not got into the face of a full-time employee. At a previous job
as a full time employee, though, I have told management when I don't see
eye-to-eye with a particular contractor and why I don't. When push
came to shove in these situations the contractor was released.
Remember, the person judged as a "lazy, worthless joke" changes with the
person making the judgement.
