But then, sometimes it depends on who's wielding the pen! Butbefore we get into that, here's a little “philosophical” publishingbackground.

Claims Magazine has a multi-purpose editorial mission. First andforemost, we exist to inform our readers on a variety of issuesthat affect/influence their job performance and career advancement.Second, we serve as a forum for the exchange of ideas, thoughts,and opinions among readers. And that is the primary reason for ouroccasional “For the Record” column. It provides readers (and othersaffiliated with the insurance industry) with a platform, a guesteditorial niche where they can share ideas or just sound off.

This sometimes presents problems, because sometimes, somereaders, somewhere, disagree with the topic or opinion expressed in“For the Record.” And by gosh, by golly, they want to make sure weknow it. This results in a letter or two, or three, or more. Theoriginal author is given an opportunity to respond to the letterwriter, should he or she choose. As with the column itself, theletters are all subject to editing by the Claims editorial staff,as are rebuttals.

With all submissions, we reserve the right to accept or rejectan article, on whatever grounds. Does the writer make a validpoint? Does the writer express himself in a reasonably logical way?Is the submission self-serving? The same scrutiny is used inchoosing letters for publication. When we receive a number ofrebuttal letters, they must be evaluated for publication, as we tryto avoid duplication of ideas/criticisms. And we never printletters that contain threats, uncalled-for sarcasm that serves nopurpose (humor is OK, though), or are deemed to be unnecessarilyhurtful or rude to our general readership or othercontributors.

Those are the rules and parameters we've put in place, and thevery reasons we won't be publishing a letter we received lastmonth. If contributors and letter writers wish to be takenseriously by editorial staffs of any publication, here are a fewdon'ts:

• Don't accuse other contributors/writers ofslander.
• Don't ever use profanity, or the words idiot,stupid, or moron. Any of these indicate the writer lacks anencompassing vocabulary, is a bully, or just never outgrew theirfourth-grade playground mentality.
• Don't threaten non-renewal of yoursubscription, and especially don't threaten us with the withdrawalof your advertising.
• Don't waste your time crying “foul” to thepublisher. He's already been alerted to the fact that you're tickedoff at one or more of the editors.
• Don't accuse others of incompetence unless youcan prove it; otherwise, it could be construed as slander (seeabove).
• Don't opine that the editor was “out to lunch”or suffering from a “long hang over” [sic]. (My slight paunch doesnot influence my editorial decisions.)

Now let's go forward and have a productive 2006 while prayingfor less stormy weather this year. If we all resolved to “playnice” and give the other guy an occasional break for the sake ofdiscussion, everyone would benefit. Insurers, insureds … and eveneditors.

And keep those cards and letters coming!