What is wrong with the following? NOTICE: This message is intended exclusively for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. This communication, including any attachments, may contain information that is proprietary, privileged, confidential or otherwise legally exempt from disclosure. If you are not the named addressee, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or disseminate this message or any part of it. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Recreation Centers of Sun City, Inc (RCSC). Finally, the recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses. RCSC accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. Many things: It is the wrong default. Especially if you want transparency and open communication. Confidential Information should be identified. The default should NOT BE EVERYTHING IS CONFIDENTIAL. Confidential information should not be shared. Clearly identify the confidential content. If it's truly confidential, don't tell me. I should be allowed to share the information I learn from simple queries. It shows laziness on the part of the RCSC. If someone from the RCSC sent me a Happy Birthday message, with this Notice, I can't tell anyone! Doggy Doo! It shows that the RCSC does not want to communicate openly. They must somehow feel threatened by a simple question. Where is their integrity? Everything isn't a secret. [I worked for a company that provided contact services to our Japanese client. I was told to answer a question as was literally asked. It was often obvious what person was really asking. The Japanese I met, told me they learned to speak English from teachers that never spoke English. This was in the late 80's. I ended up quitting the company over this. The Japanese hired me when they found out I was leaving. I never violated confidentiality of my employer. Integrity matters. The Japanese had great integrity.] It's worse than the government!
What the ??? It would thus seem if you are the named addressee then you are authorized to disclose it to others? Unless the content reveals health or personnel matters, it's a ridiculous Notice to include on any communique.
I did miss this. It does allow the addressee to share information. However it's a ludicrous notice to put in all emails. This is one of the problems with small fine print (hard to read clearly). Fine Print is where the rubber meets the road in most situations.
