[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Author Index (this month)][Thread Index (this month)][Top of Archive]

Re: Proud Non-Member of STC

Subject: Re: Proud Non-Member of STC
From: Mark Gellis <mgellis -at- KETTERING -dot- EDU>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 09:42:54 -0500

I think what Steve says is the key point...because memberships do cost money, we have to pick and choose.  Sometimes we end up saying, in effect, I support what you do and I think it's interesting and I hope we can chat about it once in a while, but I am not going to fork over $90 (and sometimes a lot more) just so I can say I'm a member.  We're saying that there are relatively few clubs where we will pay that kind of money just to say we've been inside.  :)  Sometimes membership includes a subscription to journals, etc., and that does make things more expensive, but even so, economics limits more of us than "professional politics."  When someone says "proud non-member," of course, it's different.  I am, for example, a proud non-member of the Modern Language Association because I think too often it represents the things I consider wrong with academic life in general and English Studies in particular.  I sincerely hope I will never have to attend the MLA convention again.  :)  (I won't bore people with the reasons.)  There is a big difference between saying "I like your club but not enough to pay that kind of money" and "I am staying away from you and what you represent."

Mark 

P.S. That reminds me...I do have to get my STC membership in.  The check will be in the mail soon!  Honest!  :)

Steve Fouts wrote:

Barb Ostapina <Barb -dot- Ostapina -at- METROMAIL -dot- COM> wrote:

>This is to Bruce Byfield, and I was going to send it privately, but then I
>thought others may have valuable opinions that I'd like to hear.
>
>I noticed that you (Bruce) have been signing your emails with "Proud non
>-member of the STC" and that struck me as odd. I guess I'm a victim of the
>party line that says membership in a professional organization related to
>your field of endeavor is not only desirable, but important. I have great
>respect for your ideas (at least those I've seen put forth on this list),
>and I'd really like to hear your thoughts about membership in professional
>organizations.

This has all the ear-marks of a holy war, but here goes. I too am a
former STC member. I agree with you that professional organizations
are important. I, like Lisa Higgins had some specific reasons for
being dissatisfied with STC but I don't feel the need to vent today,
so I'll save them.

Suffice it to say that I evaluated my current professional position
and goals and felt that I was better served by the Association for
Computing Machinery (ACM) special interest groups (SIGs) on
Documentation (SIGDOC) and Computer/Human Interaction (SIGCHI).

Maybe if I was rich and famous or if my current employer popped for
professional memberships the way my previous did it would be different.
I just feel that ACM gives me more bang for the buck.

    _______________   _____
   /  ___  __/__\  \ /  / _\    Steve Fouts stefou -at- eskimo -dot- com
  /___ \|  |  ___\  |  /  __\   "You must not mind me, madam;
 /   /  \  |      \   /      \   I say strange things, but I
/_______/__|_______\_/________\  mean no harm." --Samuel Johnson
       TECHWR-L has 3500+ readers--think before posting.
Search archives at: http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html,
        http://www.documentation.com/, or http://www.dejanews.com/  

Previous by Author: Re: Re[2]: Programming Languages for Technical Communication
Next by Author: new resource for writers at Kettering University
Previous by Thread: Re: Proud Non-Member of STC
Next by Thread: Re: Proud Non-Member of STC -Reply

[Top of Archive] | [Author Index (this month)] | [Thread Index (this month)]

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

Sponsored Ads