RE: [MLUG] Online Writer Needed

["Ross, Matthew" <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

> I'm gonna try and not take that as a flame, 

Implying that a simple observation and a valid question constitute a flame is in itself inflamatory.

> but our thinking 
> is this:  
> the most important thing to us (see Qualification #1) is to not have 
> some guy that's going to get into a pissing contest with 
> everyone over 
> how much he knows.

Agreed. Keep in mind that we all get into intellectual pissing contests with people we consider our peers. People calling us for help either get helped politely, or get criticized for not knowing something so simple. Those who give the latter response generally don't last long in any IT field, and you'll see that on their work record in the form of dismissals.

> In my experience, women are less likely 
> to have this 
> personality trait, and are often better at explaining things - very 
> important to us considering we're targeting the "average experienced 
> user" as our audience. 

In other words, you're not exactly an Equal Opportunity Employer, as well as being sexist. Women are just as likely to have this trait, but they apparently don't consider you their peer. This perception is related to the mistaken notion that women generally aren't technically literate.

> If we were going the TechTV route, my post would have used the word 
> "attractive".  It didn't.  It's the writing we care about, 
> not the looks.

No, its in the notion of gender. Men and women for differing reasons respond better to females presenting information. Men, even when reading tech manuals, like to think they're not totally socially inept. Women like knowing they're being represented and the notion that the perspective is one that they can relate to. These perceptions that women are nicer, more polite, or better communicators is just rationalization for sexism.

_______________________________________________
members mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/members