[LINK] Whacky Disclaimers again

[Adam Todd]

At 07:02 14/06/2008, Jan Whitaker wrote:
>At 03:23 PM 14/06/2008, Adam Todd wrote:
> > >
> > > And why do I have to return the email to the originator if it's not
> > > for me?  That just seems silly.
>
>I've had two situations of 'uh-oh' messages by two people who work in
>government recently. One was from a council staffer and the other
>from a state govt type. Both sent 'Recall' emails after sending.

I've had quite a few of those.  I had one recently from a Government 
Agency - RECALL LAST MESSAGE, DISREGARD.

Then a new message, followed by yet another recall, then another new 
message, followed by yet another recall.  i rang and asked what was 
going on, after reading how inaccurate the contents of the attachment 
were and they said they were having trouble getting the correct Word 
Document to be sent to me.


Even when they DID get it "right" they still send the wrong exclusions.


>I laughed and wrote back to the state guy saying: 'You're joking,
>right?' He didn't reply. I know we've all done it, but when the idiot
>who figures out their error and then seriously thinks a message with
>'recall' in the subject line actually does anything, I lose the
>little respect I thought I had in the first place.

Yep, I'm with you.

It may be a protocol of behaviour that started in the UK or the USA perhaps?

Not sure.