In a message dated 7/12/02 6:52:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:

> You are incorrect again Peter, I have a lot of respect for RIM. I also have
> a lot of respect for records managers. I think that respect is due them
> because of their professionalism, because of their knowledge, and because of
> their dedication. Not just because of their title or because of where they
> have performed their work.

Well David you fooled me! especially since I read the following in one of
your postings.

David wrote:
I am not saying that people should give up their RIM designation. I also
recognize that ARMA has grown to over 10,000 plus members and theirprofession
is recognized.But we are in changing times. The changes are so monumental
with regards to records management that we must adapt to these changes.
At one time there were many Blacksmiths who were associated with the
transportation industry. There are still Blacksmiths who are shoeing
horsesand fixing buggies, etc.But, when the automobile came along some of
them worked on them asBlacksmith's and then later adopted the name Auto
Mechanic. They still fixedand repaired transportation equipment. Some of them
had to learn new techniques.
I am sure that their will always be Blacksmiths working on horses,
anhonorable profession, but they are fewer in number.

Sure seems to me that you are implying that a lot of those opposed to SII/SIM
are like the blacksmiths who didn't adapt to the automobile age.

David also wrote:
What about before their were officially records managers. Weren't there file
clerks, or secretarial assistants? Records managers, as a title is a much
better fit and define the nature of the functions. All records managers
should not and will not become Strategic Information Officers. But, they need
to update their skills. They need to be recognized as a critical part of a
more important function.

Sure sounds like a lot of respect to me.


List archives at
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance