Dear Pete

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
9 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Dear Pete

Al-101
 Pete, I shall certainly send you a copy. And not only that, but I'll also send you a copy of a book that should certainly be of help. It's entitled, " An Idiot's Guide to Technical Writing". Pay heed to all that it contains and your next publishing venture should not contain the ambiguity, impreciseness, and readers' puzzlements of your first try.     

 Seriously Pete,I  have to admire your chutzpah. You actually wrote a shop manual for the Indian-made Royal Enfield, a bike you probably never put wrench to! It's of little wonder that you manual went through so many revisions and corrections.

  Another example of chutzpah is the writing of an owner's manual for the new E.F.I. Royal Enfield. This you did even though your knowledge of modern electronic fuel and ignition management is on par with the average door-knob.

  Cheers and I'd wish you a pleasant Thanksgiving but as you're north of the 49Th Parallel, I suppose I'd be about three weeks too late.

   Your pal,

       Al
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Dear Pete

Robert Powell-4
oh yea.....I like the tone of that retort....a somewhat tactful response to a cheap shot.
 
Robert

--- On Wed, 11/21/12, Al <[hidden email]> wrote:


From: Al <[hidden email]>
Subject: [Enfield] Dear Pete
To: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
Date: Wednesday, November 21, 2012, 3:11 PM



 





 Pete, I shall certainly send you a copy. And not only that, but I'll also send you a copy of a book that should certainly be of help. It's entitled, " An Idiot's Guide to Technical Writing". Pay heed to all that it contains and your next publishing venture should not contain the ambiguity, impreciseness, and readers' puzzlements of your first try.     

 Seriously Pete,I  have to admire your chutzpah. You actually wrote a shop manual for the Indian-made Royal Enfield, a bike you probably never put wrench to! It's of little wonder that you manual went through so many revisions and corrections.

  Another example of chutzpah is the writing of an owner's manual for the new E.F.I. Royal Enfield. This you did even though your knowledge of modern electronic fuel and ignition management is on par with the average door-knob.

  Cheers and I'd wish you a pleasant Thanksgiving but as you're north of the 49Th Parallel, I suppose I'd be about three weeks too late.

   Your pal,

       Al




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Dear Pete

Bullet-3
In reply to this post by Al-101
Guys, as someone (me) that has reviewed a few manuals over my years not as a mechanic or any similarity to it but I most certainly found that there are various ways of looking at manuals and the processes/steps involved for the user to actually apply the steps.

Really only with graphical images of the steps can all users make it work and to be really on the nail the variations in terminology between countries certainly does not help.  To write a universally acceptable manual would take a great deal of effort and fine if we are needing to open a nuclear reactor for sure.

Yes revisions are required when feed back comes in or we follow the steps of our own writing to see how it all goes.  Kind of like policies and procedures for ISO accreditation, the procedures are seldom fully appliable as some users go into an auto mode and little essential steps are implemented but not consciously recognised.

So here we could say, Al, for all of the comments, anything is better than nothing as many can interpret and have done successfully, however I strongly maintain, if someone can do it better, then go ahead and everyone benefits.  If we don't have the technical skills of writing, of technical writing, of editing and also of actually visualising step by step all of the processes described and being able to mentally move through each and every movement to see if it is actually correct, then what to do. To put out a perfect manual may mean that no one gets to see it ever, and such a loss where we have to know that we are imperfect anyway.

in truth it is like a choreography, a script detailed in every way to be acted out or the writing of all of the movements of Tai Chai without the visual instruction of a Master.  An audio, visual and kinaesthetic workshop manual is obviously the best solution.  Really that is working side by side a master/mechanic to know what is correct.  Written manuals will always be insufficient when offered to the unskilled for use.  But what to do when time and money are seriously restricted.

What to do guys, see the big picture and give thanks to the bullet ad RE for creating it. all is bullshit.

Chris

--- In [hidden email], Al <k3eax@...> wrote:

>
>  Pete, I shall certainly send you a copy. And not only that, but I'll also send you a copy of a book that should certainly be of help. It's entitled, " An Idiot's Guide to Technical Writing". Pay heed to all that it contains and your next publishing venture should not contain the ambiguity, impreciseness, and readers' puzzlements of your first try.     
>
>  Seriously Pete,I  have to admire your chutzpah. You actually wrote a shop manual for the Indian-made Royal Enfield, a bike you probably never put wrench to! It's of little wonder that you manual went through so many revisions and corrections.
>
>   Another example of chutzpah is the writing of an owner's manual for the new E.F.I. Royal Enfield. This you did even though your knowledge of modern electronic fuel and ignition management is on par with the average door-knob.
>
>   Cheers and I'd wish you a pleasant Thanksgiving but as you're north of the 49Th Parallel, I suppose I'd be about three weeks too late.
>
>    Your pal,
>
>        Al
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Re: Dear Pete

vijay alur
Hey Chris,
 
Very well written.
 
Al, how about you coming up with an improved manual from every point of view? That would be great.
 
 
Regards,
Vijay Alur.


________________________________
From: Bullet <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Thursday, 22 November 2012 11:19 AM
Subject: [Enfield] Re: Dear Pete

 
Guys, as someone (me) that has reviewed a few manuals over my years not as a mechanic or any similarity to it but I most certainly found that there are various ways of looking at manuals and the processes/steps involved for the user to actually apply the steps.

Really only with graphical images of the steps can all users make it work and to be really on the nail the variations in terminology between countries certainly does not help. To write a universally acceptable manual would take a great deal of effort and fine if we are needing to open a nuclear reactor for sure.

Yes revisions are required when feed back comes in or we follow the steps of our own writing to see how it all goes. Kind of like policies and procedures for ISO accreditation, the procedures are seldom fully appliable as some users go into an auto mode and little essential steps are implemented but not consciously recognised.

So here we could say, Al, for all of the comments, anything is better than nothing as many can interpret and have done successfully, however I strongly maintain, if someone can do it better, then go ahead and everyone benefits. If we don't have the technical skills of writing, of technical writing, of editing and also of actually visualising step by step all of the processes described and being able to mentally move through each and every movement to see if it is actually correct, then what to do. To put out a perfect manual may mean that no one gets to see it ever, and such a loss where we have to know that we are imperfect anyway.

in truth it is like a choreography, a script detailed in every way to be acted out or the writing of all of the movements of Tai Chai without the visual instruction of a Master. An audio, visual and kinaesthetic workshop manual is obviously the best solution. Really that is working side by side a master/mechanic to know what is correct. Written manuals will always be insufficient when offered to the unskilled for use. But what to do when time and money are seriously restricted.

What to do guys, see the big picture and give thanks to the bullet ad RE for creating it. all is bullshit.

Chris

--- In mailto:royalenfield%40yahoogroups.com, Al <k3eax@...> wrote:

>
>  Pete, I shall certainly send you a copy. And not only that, but I'll also send you a copy of a book that should certainly be of help. It's entitled, " An Idiot's Guide to Technical Writing". Pay heed to all that it contains and your next publishing venture should not contain the ambiguity, impreciseness, and readers' puzzlements of your first try.     
>
>  Seriously Pete,I  have to admire your chutzpah. You actually wrote a shop manual for the Indian-made Royal Enfield, a bike you probably never put wrench to! It's of little wonder that you manual went through so many revisions and corrections.
>
>   Another example of chutzpah is the writing of an owner's manual for the new E.F.I. Royal Enfield. This you did even though your knowledge of modern electronic fuel and ignition management is on par with the average door-knob.
>
>   Cheers and I'd wish you a pleasant Thanksgiving but as you're north of the 49Th Parallel, I suppose I'd be about three weeks too late.
>
>    Your pal,
>
>        Al
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Dear Pete

P Snidal
In reply to this post by Robert Powell-4
Oh, dear!  Looks as if Al's off his meds again!  I wonder if it would
be a help if he got himself a cat or something?

>oh yea.....I like the tone of that retort....a somewhat tactful
>response to a cheap shot.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Dear Pete

P Snidal
In reply to this post by Robert Powell-4
Oh, dear!  Looks as if Al's off his meds again!  I wonder if it would
help for him to get a cat to keep him company?
   - Assuming, of course, it wouldn't be too harmful to the cat......

>oh yea.....I like the tone of that retort....a somewhat tactful
>response to a cheap shot.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Re: Dear Pete

P Snidal
In reply to this post by Bullet-3
At 09:49 PM 11/21/2012, Chris wrote:
>Guys, as someone (me) that has reviewed a few manuals over my years
>not as a mechanic or any similarity to it but I most certainly found
>that there are various ways of looking at manuals..........................

Gawd, Chris, don't take his seriously!  You'll only encourage him!
ps

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Dear Pete

Marv & Marg
In reply to this post by Al-101
Dear Al,

I have a copy of a Royal Enfield Bullet Manual from Royal Enfield of Reddich
and one from Madras India from Enfield Motorcycles.

They are substantially different and the one from India requires an
intuitive grasp of technical terms and their translation from Hindi to
English. I do not have Pete's manual as I no longer have an iron barrel
Enfield. I have read the tripe and bile you have been spewing and can only
conclude you are not in any way an enthusiast of the Royal Enfield brand.
Pete has attempted to clear up the differences between the 2 manuals and
from all reports, very successfully. You on the other hand, seem to have no
ability as a mechanic, as an English writer or as a critic. As a spewer of
bile and nonsense you do just fine. I have gone back over the postings you
have made and have not found one posting that advances the knowledge or
understanding of Royal Enfields. The job of a critic is to advance
alternatives and corrections to what has been written. You appear to be
merely insanely jealous of Pete because he attempted to assist Royal Enfield
owners in keeping their bikes on the road in good working condition. The
fact that he did not ask for your advice in this endeavor appears to have
unhinged your alleged mind. If he asks a reasonable sum from purchasers of
his manual that is a fair and honest balance. After all, profit is one of
the motivations of any human endeavor and one of the founding principles of
the United States of America. One of the freedoms you make too much use of
is the freedom to speak whatever tripe you can and to denigrate the honest
efforts of a true enthusiast.  If you can write a more comprehensive and
accurate manual why do you not do so? To plagiarize or steal the works of
others is against the law and is punishable by a jail term in instances such
as what you have done here in releasing online the property of Royal
Enfield. To try to make points with anyone for this theft is reprehensible.
Sorry for the use of big words here but I'm sure you can steal a dictionary
to find out what they mean. Your postings are not appreciated, not honest,
not in any way an advancement of knowledge. They are childish in the extreme
and only show the world what a truly foolish person you are.

Marvin Amos,  46 year Royal Enfield rider  

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Re: Dear Pete

debasis patra
In reply to this post by vijay alur




________________________________
 From: vijay alur <[hidden email]>
To: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2012 3:01 PM
Subject: Re: [Enfield] Re: Dear Pete
 

 
Hey Chris,
 
Very well written.
 
Al, how about you coming up with an improved manual from every point of view? That would be great.
 
 
Regards,
Vijay Alur.

From: Bullet <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Thursday, 22 November 2012 11:19 AM
Subject: [Enfield] Re: Dear Pete

 
Guys, as someone (me) that has reviewed a few manuals over my years not as a mechanic or any similarity to it but I most certainly found that there are various ways of looking at manuals and the processes/steps involved for the user to actually apply the steps.

Really only with graphical images of the steps can all users make it work and to be really on the nail the variations in terminology between countries certainly does not help. To write a universally acceptable manual would take a great deal of effort and fine if we are needing to open a nuclear reactor for sure.

Yes revisions are required when feed back comes in or we follow the steps of our own writing to see how it all goes. Kind of like policies and procedures for ISO accreditation, the procedures are seldom fully appliable as some users go into an auto mode and little essential steps are implemented but not consciously recognised.

So here we could say, Al, for all of
 the comments, anything is better than nothing as many can interpret and have done successfully, however I strongly maintain, if someone can do it better, then go ahead and everyone benefits. If we don't have the technical skills of writing, of technical writing, of editing and also of actually visualising step by step all of the processes described and being able to mentally move through each and every movement to see if it is actually correct, then what to do. To put out a perfect manual may mean that no one gets to see it ever, and such a loss where we have to know that we are imperfect anyway.

in truth it is like a choreography, a script detailed in every way to be acted out or the writing of all of the movements of Tai Chai without the visual instruction of a Master. An audio, visual and kinaesthetic workshop manual is obviously the best solution. Really that is working side by side a master/mechanic to know what is correct. Written manuals
 will always be insufficient when offered to the unskilled for use. But what to do when time and money are seriously restricted.

What to do guys, see the big picture and give thanks to the bullet ad RE for creating it. all is bullshit.

Chris

--- In mailto:royalenfield%40yahoogroups.com, Al <k3eax@...> wrote:
>
>  Pete, I shall certainly send you a copy. And not only that, but I'll also send you a copy of a book that should certainly be of help. It's entitled, " An Idiot's Guide to Technical Writing". Pay heed to all that it contains and your next publishing venture should not contain the ambiguity, impreciseness, and readers' puzzlements of your first try.     
>
>  Seriously Pete,I  have to admire your chutzpah. You actually wrote a
 shop manual for the Indian-made Royal Enfield, a bike you probably never put wrench to! It's of little wonder that you manual went through so many revisions and corrections.
>
>   Another example of chutzpah is the writing of an owner's manual for the new E.F.I. Royal Enfield. This you did even though your knowledge of modern electronic fuel and ignition management is on par with the average door-knob.
>
>   Cheers and I'd wish you a pleasant Thanksgiving but as you're north of the 49Th Parallel, I suppose I'd be about three weeks too late.
>
>    Your pal,
>
>        Al
>


 
Loading...