Blacklist, take II

Subject: Blacklist, take II
From: geoff-h -at- MTL -dot- FERIC -dot- CA
Date: Mon, 5 May 1997 22:20:55 -0500

Immediately after responding to Mitch's post, I saw Linda
Merrifield's response: [paraphrase] <<Why not instead
create a list of good employers/clients?>> Excellent! There
are still problems (good ones can turn bad over time,
employees can post spurious good reviews), but this
approach is eminently defensible in a legal sense.

You'd have to have a very clear disclaimer, though: "This
list presents only companies that someone claimed to be
good. There are two caveats: (1) a company's absence from
this list is only due to the fact nobody came forward to
applaud them, and must not be considered as implicit or
explicit criticism, and (2) entries on the list represent
the personal opinions of those who submitted the reference,
and not the opinions of the list managers... buyer beware."

I'm not a lawyer, nor do I play one in e-mail, so you'd
want a legal eagle to write that out properly.

--Geoff Hart @8^{)} geoff-h -at- mtl -dot- feric -dot- ca
Disclaimer: Speaking for myself, not FERIC.

TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send commands
Search the archives at or search and
browse the archives at

Previous by Author: Foreigners in Toronto
Next by Author: Publishing blacklists
Previous by Thread: Foreigners in Toronto
Next by Thread: Publishing blacklists

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

Sponsored Ads