interviewed by cahwyguy
1. You're a technical writer, in an era where the user manual has
morphed from something useful into a series of online help pages. What is
the value of the technical writer in today's world, and how do you make
people aware of this value you perceive?
First I'm going to dispute your premise. :-)
The medium isn't important; good documentation is good because it tells you what you need to know, not because it's a paper manual rather than an online help file. There are lots of bad paper manuals out there, after all, and I've seen some good online documentation.
The value of a good technical writer is in analyzing the reader's needs and meeting them -- not by walking through the contents of the menus but, rather, by thinking about the tasks the user will need to accomplish and the vocabulary and mental models he'll bring to the task. A good technical writer is user-focused and able to write organized documentation -- and also writes precisely, concisely, and accurately.
A technical writer who is sufficiently user-focused will generate meaningful feedback about the product he's documenting, because unless your development team has a kick-butt user-testing process, the writer is the first person to take a real look through the user's eyes. So you can demonstrate your value before you've written a single word of documentation, by providing that feedback (in an appropriate venue, of course). Once you've demonstrated that you're really thinking about usage rather than just walking the menus, you're on the road to demonstrating your value as a team member independent of the actual documentation. (Oh, and you need to agitate for being a member of the development team from the beginning.)
As for the value of the documentation, I try to let the work stand for itself. I'm the sole writer in my group, and I've been told repeatedly that the ramp-up time for new engineers has gone way down in the last couple years, specifically because of the rich document set I've produced. It used to take months before new people were really net contributors; now that happens in weeks or sometimes days. It's not often that a writer gets such a clear demonstration of the impact on the bottom line, but it's great when it happens.
Otherwise, a writer demonstrates value the same way an engineer does -- peer feedback, customer feedback, the bug list, team participation, and so on.
In two of my last three positions I had to sell not just myself but my intended role. (In the third case I was hired by someone who already knew my value.) I've done that by showing what I've done in the past but also by listening to them talk about their products/projects/companies and then correctly nailing some of their problems and showing what I could do to help them. In general I'm not a salesman or an entrepaneur, but somehow I've been able to do it in this particular area. Maybe I'm just passionate about documentation? Maybe my combination of skills (technical and writing) is that unusual? I'm not sure what it is.
2. You claim to be a serious Reform Jew, in this age where Reform is still perceived as "twice-a-year, convenience Judaism". What must Reform Jews, and Reform Judaism, do to ensure that it will survive as a serious, Jewish, movement?
Disclaimer: I'm a person with strong opinions, but that doesn't make me a visionary. :-)
For one thing, we need to focus a lot more on the "informed" part of "informed choice". A lot of Reform Jews think Reform is about the freedom to "not do stuff" -- but really, it's supposed to be about autonomy, which can only come from study. So there are two problems -- people not even considering issues, and people thinking that "doing stuff" is un-Reform, or as some of our congregants like to say, "too Orthodox". People who take the religion seriously understand that an informed choice can be either pro or con, not just con.
How do we do that? While classes and lectures and stuff are helpful, they don't reach most people. We need to be sprinkling this idea around in sermons, in Sunday school, in casual conversation. Actually, getting the kids might be the easiest path -- if you can get the kids asking "so why don't we do anything for Shabbat, like at least lighting candles?" you can sometimes prod parents to actually look at things they haven't considered since they were 13. If you can get the kids to talk in school about applying torah to modern life, they'll take some of that home. And when they do, you've got to be ready to engage the curious parents in the discussion too.
We must also (continue to) define and enforce limits. Reform isn't a free-for-all; there are things that are just not acceptable in our community and other things that we require, and if we make that clear it might help people realize that this isn't just a social club. When people complain or ask about those limits or demands, we can take the opportunity to explain how they came about and help them see that there actually is serious thinking behind our behavior. Some people, even within the movement, dismiss Reform Judaism as purely feel-good Judaism, and it doesn't always take very much to show people that there's more to it.
This is related, but: we need to be less afraid of driving away "outsiders". It's ok to say that the non-Jewish spouse in an intermarriage doesn't get an aliya at the kid's bar mitzvah; if that family is really part of the community then (1) this won't be a surprise and (2) they'll have the grounding to understand why, and if that family isn't part of the community to that extent, you never had 'em anyway and they'll be gone next week no matter what you do. While we should never exclude anyone who wants to be part of us, I think we sometimes focus too much on numbers and not enough on minds and souls.
So we shouldn't be too timid, we shouldn't be afraid to talk about torah and mitzvot and obligation and God, and we shouldn't be afraid to say that Reform Judaism has expectations just as other movements (and religions) do. If we demonstrate that we take these things seriously (show, not tell), those who see things this way will join us and some of those who don't currently see things this way will re-evaluate. Some of the latter may go away, but we didn't have them anyway.
3. What is your favorite Torah portion, and why?
This is hard, because there just isn't a single clear favorite. So I'll list a few that I like for different reasons:
Lo alecha ham'lacha ligmor, v'lo atah ben chorin l'hibateil mimeinah.
Ok, ok. :-) You are not obligated to complete the task, but neither are you free from starting it. (Rabbi Tarfon.)
I think this sums up life beautifully. If we put off doing something because we fear we might screw it up, or we're waiting for someone more qualified to come along and do it, or we think someone else will do it and make our effort meaningless... well, nothing will ever get done. There's someone else out there who would do this job better? So what -- he's not here doing it, and you're here. And then there's the stuff no one else will do -- the personal endeavors that Rabbi Tarfon was really talking about. (Or so I infer, given that he goes on to talk about torah study next.) We can all improve our habits, our behavior, our dedication, and so on, and these are things we'll never get absolutely right, but that doesn't excuse us from trying to make at least small improvements.
5. You've been involved with the Internet, and the Jewish Internet, for ages? You've seen it from the early days to its current teenage years. Often, with age comes maturity, but not always. In 30 years, what do you think the overall impact of the Internet will be on the Jewish community, and communication in general.
Just one clarification first: I've been involved with the Internet for a long time, but with the Jewish Internet for less than a decade.
Ok, one big change I've seen over the last two+ decades is the degree of interconnection. We have gone from somewhat-isolated mailing lists to Usenet (diverse groups but a common framework) to the web and weblogs; we have also gone from email as a tool of the elite to broadband for the masses. More people have more and easier access to more communities and more types of information, and also to specific individuals. Mailing lists and LJ-style weblogs build communities of people; they aren't just repositories of information or entertainment.
In the past the problem was connecting; in the present (and future) it is filtering and focusing the vast quantities of stuff out there. (Ironically, we have largely abandoned Usenet to return to mailing lists -- but that's ok, because mailing lists are more accessible and they aren't the only way we connect with each other.)
So... 30 years, Internet in general: it will be routine for us to consult net resources for any question or problem (and portability will make this easy), but we won't do it by generic search engines alone because of all the noise out there. There will be various authoritative sources (sites and people), and I won't be surprised if we see some form of site validation more formal than word of mouth. With this may come more expectations -- "how was I supposed to know that?" will be less viable as a defense of erroneous behavior.
The Jewish community in particular? I think we'll see a lot more communication across traditional barriers -- we have this now geographically and among movements, but I think we'll also see it with interests, levels of learning, and other differences. As it becomes trivial for us to have study partners half a world away we'll actually do that -- and in the process develop connections to those people that are about more than just the topic at hand. But the flame wars we see now won't go away; we'll still see OCR wars in 30 years, though the easy access to data may change the shape of some of the arguments.
I think we'll also see more homogenization -- currently synagogue leaders go to conferences and workshops and stuff but most congregants don't, so their view of Judaism is shaped largely by the congregations they've belonged to (usually a small number). But as the exchange of ideas gets easier more "just plain folks" will learn what other congregations do -- and they'll bring those ideas into their own congregations without waiting for the leaders. Pretty much everyone who wants to be a player will be. So this will lead to innovation locally but more commonality overall, because an idea can spread much farther than it would via biennials.
6. (Extra Credit, because I couldn't resist) If Judge Moriarty Wapner and Rusty the Bailiff were to come back today, what would be the first five cases on the docket?
Ooh, those were the days! It's been a long time since Stupid People's Court was in session, so there's quite a backlog, but let's see: my personal top five?
First I'm going to dispute your premise. :-)
The medium isn't important; good documentation is good because it tells you what you need to know, not because it's a paper manual rather than an online help file. There are lots of bad paper manuals out there, after all, and I've seen some good online documentation.
The value of a good technical writer is in analyzing the reader's needs and meeting them -- not by walking through the contents of the menus but, rather, by thinking about the tasks the user will need to accomplish and the vocabulary and mental models he'll bring to the task. A good technical writer is user-focused and able to write organized documentation -- and also writes precisely, concisely, and accurately.
A technical writer who is sufficiently user-focused will generate meaningful feedback about the product he's documenting, because unless your development team has a kick-butt user-testing process, the writer is the first person to take a real look through the user's eyes. So you can demonstrate your value before you've written a single word of documentation, by providing that feedback (in an appropriate venue, of course). Once you've demonstrated that you're really thinking about usage rather than just walking the menus, you're on the road to demonstrating your value as a team member independent of the actual documentation. (Oh, and you need to agitate for being a member of the development team from the beginning.)
As for the value of the documentation, I try to let the work stand for itself. I'm the sole writer in my group, and I've been told repeatedly that the ramp-up time for new engineers has gone way down in the last couple years, specifically because of the rich document set I've produced. It used to take months before new people were really net contributors; now that happens in weeks or sometimes days. It's not often that a writer gets such a clear demonstration of the impact on the bottom line, but it's great when it happens.
Otherwise, a writer demonstrates value the same way an engineer does -- peer feedback, customer feedback, the bug list, team participation, and so on.
In two of my last three positions I had to sell not just myself but my intended role. (In the third case I was hired by someone who already knew my value.) I've done that by showing what I've done in the past but also by listening to them talk about their products/projects/companies and then correctly nailing some of their problems and showing what I could do to help them. In general I'm not a salesman or an entrepaneur, but somehow I've been able to do it in this particular area. Maybe I'm just passionate about documentation? Maybe my combination of skills (technical and writing) is that unusual? I'm not sure what it is.
2. You claim to be a serious Reform Jew, in this age where Reform is still perceived as "twice-a-year, convenience Judaism". What must Reform Jews, and Reform Judaism, do to ensure that it will survive as a serious, Jewish, movement?
Disclaimer: I'm a person with strong opinions, but that doesn't make me a visionary. :-)
For one thing, we need to focus a lot more on the "informed" part of "informed choice". A lot of Reform Jews think Reform is about the freedom to "not do stuff" -- but really, it's supposed to be about autonomy, which can only come from study. So there are two problems -- people not even considering issues, and people thinking that "doing stuff" is un-Reform, or as some of our congregants like to say, "too Orthodox". People who take the religion seriously understand that an informed choice can be either pro or con, not just con.
How do we do that? While classes and lectures and stuff are helpful, they don't reach most people. We need to be sprinkling this idea around in sermons, in Sunday school, in casual conversation. Actually, getting the kids might be the easiest path -- if you can get the kids asking "so why don't we do anything for Shabbat, like at least lighting candles?" you can sometimes prod parents to actually look at things they haven't considered since they were 13. If you can get the kids to talk in school about applying torah to modern life, they'll take some of that home. And when they do, you've got to be ready to engage the curious parents in the discussion too.
We must also (continue to) define and enforce limits. Reform isn't a free-for-all; there are things that are just not acceptable in our community and other things that we require, and if we make that clear it might help people realize that this isn't just a social club. When people complain or ask about those limits or demands, we can take the opportunity to explain how they came about and help them see that there actually is serious thinking behind our behavior. Some people, even within the movement, dismiss Reform Judaism as purely feel-good Judaism, and it doesn't always take very much to show people that there's more to it.
This is related, but: we need to be less afraid of driving away "outsiders". It's ok to say that the non-Jewish spouse in an intermarriage doesn't get an aliya at the kid's bar mitzvah; if that family is really part of the community then (1) this won't be a surprise and (2) they'll have the grounding to understand why, and if that family isn't part of the community to that extent, you never had 'em anyway and they'll be gone next week no matter what you do. While we should never exclude anyone who wants to be part of us, I think we sometimes focus too much on numbers and not enough on minds and souls.
So we shouldn't be too timid, we shouldn't be afraid to talk about torah and mitzvot and obligation and God, and we shouldn't be afraid to say that Reform Judaism has expectations just as other movements (and religions) do. If we demonstrate that we take these things seriously (show, not tell), those who see things this way will join us and some of those who don't currently see things this way will re-evaluate. Some of the latter may go away, but we didn't have them anyway.
3. What is your favorite Torah portion, and why?
This is hard, because there just isn't a single clear favorite. So I'll list a few that I like for different reasons:
- Yitro -- because when all is said and done, it really is about our covenant with God. If I had to choose a single portion, I guess it would be this one.
- Lech L'cha -- "uproot your life and follow a God you didn't previously know about" resonates somewhat with me. :-)
- Ha'azinu -- the poetry is really pretty.
- Noach -- epic-style storytelling with a real human touch. Yeah, you'd expect me to choose B'reishit for that, but somehow I connect more with Noach's human foibles than with Adam's (and Kayin's). I think of Noach as a real person but Adam and Chava as archtypes, for some reason. I'm not saying they are -- just that that's how my gut perceives them.
Lo alecha ham'lacha ligmor, v'lo atah ben chorin l'hibateil mimeinah.
Ok, ok. :-) You are not obligated to complete the task, but neither are you free from starting it. (Rabbi Tarfon.)
I think this sums up life beautifully. If we put off doing something because we fear we might screw it up, or we're waiting for someone more qualified to come along and do it, or we think someone else will do it and make our effort meaningless... well, nothing will ever get done. There's someone else out there who would do this job better? So what -- he's not here doing it, and you're here. And then there's the stuff no one else will do -- the personal endeavors that Rabbi Tarfon was really talking about. (Or so I infer, given that he goes on to talk about torah study next.) We can all improve our habits, our behavior, our dedication, and so on, and these are things we'll never get absolutely right, but that doesn't excuse us from trying to make at least small improvements.
5. You've been involved with the Internet, and the Jewish Internet, for ages? You've seen it from the early days to its current teenage years. Often, with age comes maturity, but not always. In 30 years, what do you think the overall impact of the Internet will be on the Jewish community, and communication in general.
Just one clarification first: I've been involved with the Internet for a long time, but with the Jewish Internet for less than a decade.
Ok, one big change I've seen over the last two+ decades is the degree of interconnection. We have gone from somewhat-isolated mailing lists to Usenet (diverse groups but a common framework) to the web and weblogs; we have also gone from email as a tool of the elite to broadband for the masses. More people have more and easier access to more communities and more types of information, and also to specific individuals. Mailing lists and LJ-style weblogs build communities of people; they aren't just repositories of information or entertainment.
In the past the problem was connecting; in the present (and future) it is filtering and focusing the vast quantities of stuff out there. (Ironically, we have largely abandoned Usenet to return to mailing lists -- but that's ok, because mailing lists are more accessible and they aren't the only way we connect with each other.)
So... 30 years, Internet in general: it will be routine for us to consult net resources for any question or problem (and portability will make this easy), but we won't do it by generic search engines alone because of all the noise out there. There will be various authoritative sources (sites and people), and I won't be surprised if we see some form of site validation more formal than word of mouth. With this may come more expectations -- "how was I supposed to know that?" will be less viable as a defense of erroneous behavior.
The Jewish community in particular? I think we'll see a lot more communication across traditional barriers -- we have this now geographically and among movements, but I think we'll also see it with interests, levels of learning, and other differences. As it becomes trivial for us to have study partners half a world away we'll actually do that -- and in the process develop connections to those people that are about more than just the topic at hand. But the flame wars we see now won't go away; we'll still see OCR wars in 30 years, though the easy access to data may change the shape of some of the arguments.
I think we'll also see more homogenization -- currently synagogue leaders go to conferences and workshops and stuff but most congregants don't, so their view of Judaism is shaped largely by the congregations they've belonged to (usually a small number). But as the exchange of ideas gets easier more "just plain folks" will learn what other congregations do -- and they'll bring those ideas into their own congregations without waiting for the leaders. Pretty much everyone who wants to be a player will be. So this will lead to innovation locally but more commonality overall, because an idea can spread much farther than it would via biennials.
6. (Extra Credit, because I couldn't resist) If Judge Moriarty Wapner and Rusty the Bailiff were to come back today, what would be the first five cases on the docket?
Ooh, those were the days! It's been a long time since Stupid People's Court was in session, so there's quite a backlog, but let's see: my personal top five?
- The People vs. the Outlook design and propegation teams. The charge: destruction of public property (email standards -- it's supposed to be plain text, bozos!) and negligence leading to virus spread.
- The People vs. Inconsiderate Cell-Phone Users. The charge: self-explanatory. Theatres, fine restaurants, and restrooms are just wrong, guys.
- The Net vs. Uneducated Posters on Mailing Lists. The charge: failing to trim the message you're responding to, failing to take off-topic banter to private email, and getting indignant in the face of private gentle correction.
- The People vs. Manufacturers. The charge: not standing behind your warranties, or giving customers grief about it. Don't make promises you can't, or won't, keep.
- Consumers vs. Automated Service Industries. The charge: replacing humans with machines, doing it badly, and then taking it out on the guy who's stuck in your voice-mail mess (no operator present) or the customer you're now charging to use the ATM you pushed.