> In article <000401be10b5$e5c26580$23bf8fc2@osborne>, Adrian
Midgley
> <[log in to unmask]> writes
> >>I assert my moral right to be identified as the author of some
of
> >>the posting below. IE quote away. Some of it is in my PCCG-IT
lead
> >>diary, which will eventually be discoverable on the web but I'm
not
> >>telling you the URL today<g>
>
> OK , Adrian - I apologise.. just didn't want to identify anyone
> *without* prior permission.. even if GP-UK is in the public
domain....
> Advise me as to the netiquette! ;->>>
No apology required, this was retrospective permission.
In general if it is on GP-UK and from me then attribute it.
> I got a reaction - somewhat pained - but I suppose the same
scruples
> applly!
Depends.
If this was somebody employed by a public body
answering a legitimate question or responding
to a matter within their sphere raised by a member of the public,
then it is quite reasonable to attribute it.
If nothing else, they can otherwise expect to get the same
question/alert from dozens of us, interefering with their getting on
and fixing things.
Was the pained response from anyone who knows me?
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|