Well, then,

Posted By: (sm) on 2008-12-23
In Reply to: I already know the definitions - EmmaMT

why didn't you say so. Your OP only asks for a definition and says nothing about what you were really digging for.

IMO someone who cannot do all work types is not as valuable as one who can do any job that comes up and do it well.

It could possibly be hurting the other guy, but any reasonable office would understand when it is explained why one office is receiving a lower rate for less work (and a smart one would then work it out to have their stuff normaled in the same way).

I agree about AHDI.

I will still refer you to their web site for their definitions of three levels of MTs.

Complete Discussion Below:

marks the location of current message within thread

Please define - EmmaMT
- Go to the web site for - (sm)
  - I already know the definitions - EmmaMT
    - Well, then, - (sm)
      - well, aren't we high maka'makas - oh my
        Not really, I was not - (sm)
        k, so, so... - oh my
        are ALL valuable - EmmaMT
        oh brother... - oh my
        WOW . . . - (sm)
        I was giving you a compliment... - oh my
        You've got - (sm)
        valuable (irreplaceable) - oh my

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

Other related messages found in our database