Now I have an idea of what they see - it seems they are using the address
for a request about school closures for everything right now

Here is the latest wrong reply
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/notice_of_school_closure_st_marg#incoming-264209


Other wrong replies attached to that request are:-
*
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/notice_of_school_closure_st_marg#incoming-252761
* - To do with council use of volunteers
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/notice_of_school_closure_st_marg#incoming-262254
-
To do with speed limits
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/notice_of_school_closure_st_marg#incoming-263354
-
Different request re volunteers
etc

This is particularly bad - but there are others on other request too - some
have kindly been moved by the team, others I have annotated with cross
links - and some are stuck in 'limbo' and will only be found again by
accident!

Regards

Paul /)/+)

On 16 March 2012 01:23, Francis Irving <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 09:43:58AM -0700, Julian Todd wrote:
> > It's simple: Just put the title of the request and the unique
> > identifier number you're using for the email address into the subject.
> >  And then verify against it and override the email address id number
> > in cases where they were both issued for the same authority.
>
> Looking at some of the emails Paul has received in the admin
> interface, they often have subjects that have been reentered from
> scratch by the council, usually inserting their own reference.
>
> e.g. "Request for Information Ref:P0008478"
>
> Paul, could you give some links to specific messages which were
> incorrectly delivered to the wrong request? Or else it is all
> theory.
>
> Francis
>
> > This would probably be obvious to all of us if we actually received
> > these emails ourselves, which we don't.
> >
> > It's the same reason why many reasonable people have finger-shredding
> > impossible to use letter slots through their front door which they
> > could easily fix -- there never is an occasion when they put a letter
> > through their own door and find out the problem.
> >
> > Julian.
> >
> >
> >
> > On 14 March 2012 01:26, Mark Goodge <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On 14/03/2012 00:12, paul perrin wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I put in quite a few FoI requests to Brghton and Hove council - and
> > >> their responses keep coming back attached to the *WRONG* request.
> > >>
> > >> I contact the team and ask for the responses to be moved - but
> > >> realistically it makes 'what do they know' more trouble than writing
> > >> directly...
> > >>
> > >> I don't know where the fault is - the council or the whatdotheyknow
> > >> software, but it really needs to be sorted...
> > >
> > >
> > > My guess is that what's happening is that they've taken the one-time
> address
> > > generated by WDTK for the first request, and then stored that in their
> > > system as your address, and any subsequent requests from you are being
> > > replied to that address. Or, more simply, whoever is replying is just
> > > looking for "Paul Perrin" in their Outlook address book and taking the
> first
> > > match.
> > >
> > > I'm not sure there's a simple way around that. The other option would
> be for
> > > WDTK to generate a unique address per user, instead of per request,
> and then
> > > route responses to the correct request by means of the subject line or
> > > something. But that in turn is likely to break when confronted by
> either a
> > > ticketing system at the remote end which rewrites subject lines, or an
> > > individual user who writes a new email (as opposed to hitting "reply")
> and
> > > composes a new title (typically, "Response to your FOI request" or
> something
> > > equally meaningless).
> > >
> > > Mark
> > > --
> > >  Sent from my Babbage Difference Engine 2
> > >  http://mark.goodge.co.uk
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > developers-public mailing list
> > > [email protected]
> > >
> https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public
> > >
> > > Unsubscribe:
> > >
> https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/options/developers-public/julian%40publicwhip.org.uk
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > developers-public mailing list
> > [email protected]
> >
> https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public
> >
> > Unsubscribe:
> https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/options/developers-public/francis%40mysociety.org
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> developers-public mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public
>
> Unsubscribe:
> https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/options/developers-public/paul%40idltd.com
>
_______________________________________________
developers-public mailing list
[email protected]
https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public

Unsubscribe: 
https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/options/developers-public/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to