The issue of trust 2

There are three categories of people and organisations when it comes to sending them letters by email and corresponding with them generally.

Category (1) Those who have an ordinary email address readily available.

Category (2) Those who only have an email form, but who respond by email to letters sent to them  using this form, thus providing you with an ordinary email address which you can use when sending them letters in the future.

Category (3) Those who only have an email form, but who respond by email to letters sent to them using this form, thus providing you with an ordinary email address, but you can’t use it in the future because you are warned that it is not “monitored” or a word or words to that effect – in other words, you ALWAYS have to use their email form, every time.

It is our very strong opinion that if you know which category people or organisations fall into, you know even before you start trying to correspond and deal with them how likely it is that they are going to be good to deal with, how trustworthy and so on, category (1) people and organisations being easily the best, and category (3) people and organisations being easily the worst. We feel this so strongly that, in the normal course, we wouldn’t consider trying to deal with a category (3) person or organisation for a nanosecond.

A typical example of a category (3) organisation is the one, laughingly called the Australian  Health Practitioner Regulation Agency, (AHPRA.) But, of course, they are a government monopoly, so you have no choice but to follow their rules if you want to deal with them.

Of course, whatever means you use to send letters to people and organisations, whether they respond to you – that is the next question.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.