Dear Michael, Why bothering responding to an enquiry, based on your assumptions about the requester, without having any understanding of the circumstances of the enquiry?
No I didn't continue to attempt sending a critical request by email for 30 days. The world does actually extends beyond US borders, and in the UK we have statutes and legislation that from your statements you don't understand. Under Section 1 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 I have a legal and general right of access to information held by a public authority (government). (a) to be informed in writing by the public authority whether it holds information of the description specified in the request, and (b) if that is the case, to have that information communicated to him. Under Section 8 of the Act I am legally entitled to request the said information in writing, including by electronic means (email) (1)In this Act any reference to a “request for information” is a reference to such a request which— (a)is in writing, (b)states the name of the applicant and an address for correspondence, and (c)describes the information requested. (2)For the purposes of subsection (1)(a), a request is to be treated as made in writing where the text of the request— (a)is transmitted by electronic means, (b)is received in legible form, and (c)is capable of being used for subsequent reference. Therefore the public authority in question would be operating outside the law by putting in place a system to discard my request, sent via email, unread, simply because it was sent by me, if they had taken the conscious decision to configure their system to discard my emails because they had chosen to blacklist me. They had done so and have made statements in writing that it was accidental. They have also claimed to be unaware that they had done so, which I have plenty of proof contradicting, and therefore once again accidentally allowed the blacklisting of all my email communications to continue for 3 months. I am in the process of taken this matter to a First-tier Information Tribunal, not to obtain the information originally requested, but in order to demonstrate to the Tribunal that the public authority were operating outside the law in their actions. As I had no knowledge of email systems personally I thought I might rely on the knowledge of others better informed in that particular area. The answer is not to just allow government, at either a local or national level, to just ignore peoples rights under the law, by giving in and just sending a letter instead, when that person is acting within his legal rights to communicate by electronic means. I have taken the ICO to Tribunal before and during the course of preparation for the tribunal I had sent over 200 pages of evidence in pdf format via email to the Commissioner. Should I have had to send all that in hard copy, by mail with the cost of sign for delivery, when I am legally entitled to do so by email? BTW Michael in your personnel bounce back message: "Because I own this computer and can decide who I don't want to here from (state 14)" do actually you mean "hear from"? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d _______________________________________________ AMaViS-user mailing list AMaViS-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user Please visit http://www.ijs.si/software/amavisd/ regularly For administrativa requests please send email to rainer at openantivirus dot org
