ANTIPATTERN - Analysts writing stories for the developer
Gherkin allows Business Analysts to document acceptance tests in a language developers, QA & the business can understand (i.e. the language of Gherkin). By having a common language to describe acceptance tests, it encourages collaboration and a common understanding of the tests being run. - Gherkin for business analysts
Having analysts write and read stories instead of programmers was an explicit goal of most BDD tools like Cucumber. This was an enticing prospect - the developer wouldn't have to write tests (what a chore!). The product owner
However, the reality of these tools is that stakeholders are interested in even reading these stories, let alone writing them.
This is an explicit non-goal of hitchstory. The framework is designed such that it does not have loops, conditionals or other such accoutrements of a programming language and could be written by a sophisticated product manager, but it is still a tool squarely aimed at developers.
Story maintenance and writing is a bit like programming
Well maintained stories will typically be readable and comprehensible by non-programmers with a good knowledge of the domain (unlike code), but they will likely not be very good at writing or maintaining high quality stories - at least, not without prior training.
That said, pairing with business analysts while writing and maintaining stories, especially on an ad hoc basis can be a supremely effective workflow for doing stakeholder collaboration.
Should testers write stories?
While developers need to be involved in writing the stories, the developers primarily writing the stories need not necessarily be the developers writing the application.