On Tue, Jun 24, 2003, Sam Varghese wrote: > On 24 Jun 2003 at 12:09, Jan Schmidt wrote: > > > Sam, > > > > In your article > > > > (http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/06/23/1056220519703.html) > > , you > > state that "The Sydney, Canberra and Adelaide user groups did not > > bother to respond." > > An email was sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Monday, June 16. The > story ran a week later which I think is enough time for a response.
<snipped Sam's copy of his mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sam, A few points in response to your mail: First, the SLUG president, Jeff Waugh, cannot find a copy of your mail. He has also been overseas for the last fortnight and not in a position to regularly read his mail. You would have been better off emailing the entire committee for comment, as was strongly suggested by SLUG's contact details page. Second, there remains a vast difference between stating that you did not receive a reply to your email, and stating that SLUG "did not bother to respond". The final paragraph of your article is a misrepresentation of what took place, and unfairly portrays SLUG as having ignored an inquiry that, in fact, the SLUG committee did not receive. Yours sincerely, SLUG Committee -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
