Tech writing position available...

[Edward C. Bailey]

(Before the flames about off-topic/commercial/whatever posts start, be
aware that, before posting, I asked Karsten if he thought this was an
appropriate use of the list.  His response was that he personally thought
people might be interested in job opportunities, but felt my post would be
a good opportunity for people to weigh in with their own thoughts on the
matter.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

rPath is currently searching for a technical writer to join our team.

The person hired for this position will be responsible for documenting
rPath's technologies, such as Conary and rBuilder.

We're looking for people with:

    o A well-developed writing style

    o Experience documenting complex technical subject matter, from initial
      concept through final editing

    o Strong spelling, grammar, and writing

    o The ability to edit and perform peer reviews of others' work

    o At least two years of recent Linux experience

    o Proven expertise in DocBook (XML or SGML), and HTML

    o Familiarity with open source authoring tools for the above formats

    o The ability to thrive in a fast-paced work environment (this is a
      startup, after all)

Any of the following would be a definite plus:

    o Linux system administration experience -- even if it's just your own
      system(s)

    o Familiarity with one or more software packaging technologies (such as
      Conary, RPM, and dpkg)

    o Knowledge of XSL/XSLT

    o CSS experience

    o Familiarity with wikis

    o Programming experience (Python preferably)

Writing samples will be requested, so be prepared to give us online
pointers, emails bulging with attached PDFs, or even offer to send us a
FedEx'ed package full of manuals.

This position is located in Raleigh, NC -- if you're not local, you must be
willing to relocate.

Interested?  Get in touch with us via this page:

                http://www.rpath.com/corp/about/employment/

-- 
Ed Bailey                          http://public.xdi.org/=edward.c.bailey
rPath, Inc.                        http://www.rpath.com/

[Tommy Reynolds]

Uttered "Edward C. Bailey" <ed(a)rpath.com&gt;, spake thus:

>  (Before the flames about off-topic/commercial/whatever posts start,
> be
>  aware that, before posting, I asked Karsten if he thought this was an
>  appropriate use of the list.  His response was that he personally thought
>  people might be interested in job opportunities, but felt my post would be
>  a good opportunity for people to weigh in with their own thoughts on the
>  matter.) 
I am in favor of allowing principals-only to make such requests here
but I don't think headhunters should be allowed the same grace.  Why
the difference?  I would hate wading through off-topic solicitations,
cattle-call resume/CV requests and the like.  Allowing first-person
requests here will still require that we politely correct any body
shop that finds out about it, but that would be OK: we would be
protecting our own interests.

Summary: principal or first-person solicitations only, no advertising
nor any headhunters.

Your opinion may differ and that's OK with me.  I'm not trying to
convert anybody.

Cheers

[Karsten Wade]

On Sun, 2005-10-30 at 13:24 -0600, Tommy Reynolds wrote:

>  Summary: principal or first-person solicitations only, no
> advertising
>  nor any headhunters. 
+1

I think this is the time-honored practice of LUGs, right?  That is the
model I was thinking of.

As Ed's post points out, I didn't feel qualified to decide for all of
you what you think.  If you have a different opinion, please let us
know.

- Karsten
-- 
Karsten Wade, RHCE * Sr. Tech Writer * http://people.redhat.com/kwade/
gpg fingerprint:  2680 DBFD D968 3141 0115    5F1B D992 0E06 AD0E 0C41   
                       Red Hat SELinux Guide
http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/enterprise/RHEL-4-Manual/selinux-guide/

[Patrick W. Barnes]

Karsten Wade wrote:
>  On Sun, 2005-10-30 at 13:24 -0600, Tommy Reynolds wrote:
>
>    
> > Summary: principal or first-person solicitations only, no advertising
> > nor any headhunters.
> >     
>
>  +1
>
>  I think this is the time-honored practice of LUGs, right?  That is the
>  model I was thinking of.
>     
+1

Such a practice has worked well for many LUGs for many years.  I think
it is a suitable way to allow limited, targeted offers to reach an
audience which will often include capable and interested parties.  I
think that such a practice is beneficial to both sides.

-- 
Patrick "The N-Man" Barnes
nman64(a)n-man.com

www.n-man.com
--