oh - just seen the later 'what lisa said' thread - so this is probably redundant (apart from the publicity!).
2009/7/6 paul perrin <[email protected]> > I think a similarly high profile 'right to reply' would be in order. > 99.99% of the people reading the 'right to reply' will not have seen the > original story, and 99.99% of people who saw the original story will not see > the right to reply... > > So don't directly mention the original story in the 'right to reply' - just > say how wonderful 'mysociety' is, and mention in passing that it is financed > by public contributions (of time and money) and is jealously independant so > would not disclose any data unless obliged by law etc... > > A google on "You are a disgrace (including all the other honourable > members)" (having uniquely weird grammar) shows mail, telegraph and guardian > from MSM. > > Paul /)/+) > > ps. looking further I have just seen the guaridan story is about the > mysociety denial! pump that publicity!! > > > 2009/7/6 Tom Steinberg <[email protected]> > > I will ask all the journalists who published the story without >> checking (and perhaps the bloggers too) if they'd like to donate, as >> part of asking for corrections! >> >> Tom >> >> >> >> 2009/7/6 Alexander Harrowell <[email protected]>: >> > On Monday 06 July 2009 15:40:03 Matthew Somerville wrote: >> > >> >> > I would guess that - if the story is not actually invented out of >> whole >> > >> >> > cloth, which has to be a live consideration - they picked up a >> > >> >> > confirmation e-mail coming *in*. >> > >> >> >> > >> >> Hmm, I guess there are chinks in my armour even when I try to be >> totally >> > >> >> clear. You can't comment on TheyWorkForYou without registering, so >> > >> >> comments are either visible or reactively hidden if they're drawn to >> our >> > >> >> attention. No comment equal to, or like in any way I tried, the one >> > >> >> quoted by the Telegraph exists in the site's database in any form that >> I >> > >> >> can find. Just to be clear :) >> > >> >> >> > >> > I'm not arguing that the comment exists, just that a >> click-here-to-confirm >> > message might have been detected by inbound e-mail monitoring. >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Mailing list [email protected] >> > Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: >> > >> https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Mailing list [email protected] >> Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: >> >> https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public >> > >
_______________________________________________ Mailing list [email protected] Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public
