RE: Outrageous: Was Pray for me

Subject: RE: Outrageous: Was Pray for me
From: "Larry Sanderson" <lsanderson -at- uswest -dot- net>
To: "Tim Altom" <taltom -at- simplywritten -dot- com>, "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 10:15:00 -0500

Hmm, is it just me, or was he asked for a PROTOTYPE, not a finished product?

-----Original Message-----
From: bounce-techwr-l-35291 -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
[mailto:bounce-techwr-l-35291 -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com]On Behalf Of Tim Altom
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2000 8:28 AM
To: TECHWR-L
Subject: Outrageous: Was Pray for me


Excuse me, but I have to point something out here...this post, as well as
several others, have purported to rescue the original poster from a jam. But
nobody so far has noted that the product in question is a medical one,
requiring FDA approval. Under these conditions why on earth should the
writer in question even be considering doing these kludgy workarounds? This
isn't an obscure accounting package; it's intended for saving life and/or
limb. Why is this being allowed to take place? Are we not countenancing this
by offering these pathetic rescue tidbits?






Previous by Author: Re: FrameMaker running headers and footers
Next by Author: RE: Developing Surveys
Previous by Thread: RE: Outrageous: Was Pray for me
Next by Thread: Re: Outrageous: Was Pray for me


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads