At Oracle, we have email addresses that fulfill specific business
requirements (for instance, for each product we sell, there is an
email id infoXXX where XXX is a code indicating the product). These
email addresses are used to provide official responses to questions
and are covered at all times; when someone goes on vacation or is is
sick, they find someone else to answer the email while they are gone,
if someone changes responsibilities within the company or quits,
someone else takes over the infoXXX email address. This provides
fixed addresses to send questions to in a company with frequent
promotions/resignations/turnover.
Thus organizational identities are peers of personal identities, and
only one of them need be specified in the address/identification of
the letter. It is up to the company to monitor who has access to
organization identities. So, I think that organizational identity should
be the *only* thing included, the person who sent the email should be
irrelevant. For personal email, the person should be the *only* thing
included. The two identities are peers rather than subsets or
supersets of one another.
If you really want to identify that you are the person sending email
from one of the organizational email addresses, you include a
personalized signature at the end of the message. But of course, this
is not the important part.
Mark
P.S. These organizational email addresses/mailboxes are considered
company property and can be inspected by company officials at any
time. Our private email addresses/mailboxes are not open to this
inspection (company policy).
__________ __ __ _ __ __ ___________________________________________
mwarren(_at_)us(_dot_)(__)|-</-\(__ |_ =_ .com Fax: 415-506-1113 RIPEM key on
server
: Date: Wed, 22 Sep 1993 11:33:15 -0400 (EDT)
: From: peace(_at_)bix(_dot_)com
: Subject: Corporate Identity = Personal Identity
: To: pem-dev(_at_)tis(_dot_)com
: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
: X-Cosy-To: pem-dev(_at_)tis(_dot_)com
:
: Bob> Assuming that we
: use digital signatures and encryption for anything more important than
: idle cocktail party chatter, the organizational affiliation of an individual
: lies at the core of who that person IS, in a very real sense. This may not
: be politically correct or sufficiently utopian for some, but I think it is a
FACT.
:
: I hope that you are wrong. It is a very depressing thought to me that a
: person is defined solely by where he works. This is especially true in
: a world where corporate loyality extends to the next quarterly statement
: and employement is the most tranistory of FACTS.
:
: Read the newspaper, EDI will be used for all health submittals under the
: Billary Health Plan. How tightly do YOU want all this information on
: your past tied together?
:
: nb. I earlier found it appropriate to leave off my corporate affiliation and,
: in the aftermath of certain well-known public announcements, find that even
: my name ties me back to a corporate identity. That too has created
: problems for me. I now wish that I make any statement at all that was
: not seen as reflecting some corporate policy. A corporate affiliation can
: be guilt by association in this small town atmoshpere.
:
: Peace ...