I have received an email
From: Gary Spedding <email@example.com>
Sent: Friday, September 4, 2020 6:26 PM
Subject: Seeking CLP Nominations – Gary Spedding
Unfortunately I cannot publish it because it is addressed to “undisclosed-recipients:” and signed off with the following dire warning:
*This email contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual(s) named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail or any attachments found herein. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. WARNING: Computer viruses can be transmitted via email. The recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses.*
As the email is sent to “undisclosed-recipients:” clearly I am not the “individual(s) named” and therefore I cannot “disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail or any attachments found herein” as I am “strictly prohibited” from “disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information”
Which is a pity. I have notified “he sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake” and deleted “delete this e-mail from your system” as instructed . It that I also offered Mr Spedding teh opportunity resend me the email without the silly warning. But in response he accused me of being pedantic and trying to frustrate his campaign. Yet he is unwilling to take opportunity offered to send me an email without the silly disclaimer. He claims that the disclaimer is standard and that MPs always include it in their emails. I am puzzled as to why if he wants exposure for his campaign he is adamant that such a disclaimer is necessary.