I think I know what you are replying to, a posting by Tom
Marchant who beat me to this point.
I'm not an attorney, but I have had to work with and around many.
If I remember correctly, there is a legal requirement to be able
to go back and reproduce reports for some number of years. I
think it is for this reason different entities capture reports
and archive them.
Depending on the data, should something come up requiring
research involving this data, what is being done may not be
sufficient.
In this case, if it were me, I would use a formal complaint
process that is supposedly anonymous, and have someone put in
their own words .... And have them file it. This gives one
plausible deniability.
And I would not in any way say anything on any forum about it if
I were to have done such. Not saying that I ever have done such.
I would also have a way to prove that I was the one that caused
such to be filed in case there would be some legal action -- a
get out of jail free card, as it were.
Just say'n'.
Steve Thompson
On 2/9/2023 9:25 AM, Tom Longfellow wrote:
VERY GOOD POINT.
Interesting that the subjects of Lawyers has not been brought up here at all.
It is a Judiciary agency and Everybody is a wanna-be Lawyer or Judge.
And my opinion of Auditors is pretty low. They just come in. Rerun procedures and
checks developed in the 70's and published in a book. With no regard for the real world
functions of the systems. And then they go to the battlefield and "Shoot the
survivors"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
