http://main.stelede.com/ant.html
SC
On 27 November 2013 00:41, Adrian Midgley <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Arrival of an urgent cascade marked for information which left our local NHS
> ziggurat on Friday morning caused me to remark that if such things as this
> are marked as _urgent_ rather than perhaps _important_ which they genuinely
> are even though there is nothing whatsoever new about this one, and it
> restates a position unchanged since 1967 (but is confidential and therefore
> I am enjoined not to actually tell you what it is about) then at some time
> when a plume of aerial nastiness drifts this way and I am to make ready to
> deal with the consequences in the next half hour the powers that be will be
> a little short of descriptive terms for it.
>
> Hopefully my comment will be anti-cascaded, a process perhaps a little like
> that of one of the remaining Alaskan Salmon trying to get up to its spawning
> ground, and as attended by obstacles and bears.
>
>
> However, it occurs to me that this comment will be in the inboxes or
> store-and-forward depots of many of my colleagues a second or 5 after I
> click "send" and without requiring someone in Plymouth to receive it from
> someone in (working hours in) London and then - during working hours
> "urgently" - send it to a myriad of Practice Managers and others who will,
> when they come in to work send it by actual manual and intellectual effort
> to each of us.
>
> TLDR: we know how to do emails, and the "cascade" is a dribble of shit down
> a creek compared to a set of nested email list servers, each _maintained_ by
> someone in the province, but not operated by them.
>
> It is another clear indication that NHS admin thinks of pieces of paper and
> shuffles them even when they are electronic messages. The pattern of
> thinking is not one that is fit for the purpose nor is the technical
> approach.
>
> Time to abandon that which works slowly and takes effort.
>
|