[LINK] My letter to the local paper

[Jim Birch]

You might not state it explicitly but there a basic implication that MyHR
is bad and we're better off without it, isn't there?  Maybe I'm misreading
and you're in favour of a shared health record but against some aspects of
the implementation?  In the circumstances you might say so because it is
rather misleading if you don't.   (And at times like this, every bit of
sanity helps.)

Jim

On Tue, 24 Jul 2018 at 13:21, Karl Auer <kauer at biplane.com.au> wrote:

> On Tue, 2018-07-24 at 11:12 +1000, Jim Birch wrote:
> >  "To avoid that risk, you might consider pointing out errors and
> > untruths specifically and explicitly."
> >
> > Sure: what are the specific actual harms that have occurred
>
> That is not pointing out an error, that's asking a question. Not a bad
> question, just an irrelevant one.
>
> My concerns are valid even if there has been no harm done yet. "Look, a
> tidal wave! Run away!" "Nah, nothing's happened yet..."
>
> You have not yet provided a single actual counterargument. Just some
> reasons why you think My Health Record is a good thing, plus the odd
> insult.
>
> Once again: Did I make any untrue statements in my "letter to the
> paper"? If so, which ones and how are they untrue?
>
> Regards, K.
>
> --
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Karl Auer (kauer at biplane.com.au)
> http://www.biplane.com.au/kauer
> http://twitter.com/kauer389
>
> GPG fingerprint: A0CD 28F0 10BE FC21 C57C 67C1 19A6 83A4 9B0B 1D75
> Old fingerprint: A52E F6B9 708B 51C4 85E6 1634 0571 ADF9 3C1C 6A3A
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Link mailing list
> Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
>