Re: New word in operative report

By the way, interesting that anyone would insinuate it would be the person answering an online question's fault. If I had come in here and said that I'd asked a question, got an answer, used it, and then was penalized by QA or fired because it was wrong answser, I'd be told that one should ALWAYS verify answers received on line, wouldn't I?

You can keep this going if you want. Sending private information off shore is wrong. That's plain and simple and there is no making it right. It's not buying or selling batteries or watches. You can make all the stupid, illogical arguements you want, but they will never wash with me. But of course you're thinking of it as a business person, right? You might be able to save a few cents while you put my health and personal information at risk overseas.


RaeMorrill wrote:
How did I know that issue would come up? Well, the particular instance in question would never matter in a report. It's a statement of a situation that's already occurred (procedure), not something that would dictate future care. In that case, I'd likely just not give them any help at all. If they are asking basic questions like that, there is a ton of stuff they have wrong they don't even know about.



Jeannie Wilson wrote:

RaeMorrill <RaeMorrill@xxxxxxx> wrote here for all to seenews:KdPPe.40433$EX.38387@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:


If they have the BALLs to come to a mostly American newsgroup and ask for basic help that they should be getting from whomever it was that hired them, I will F**K with them and as much as I can except for the anti-Americans running interference.



They might be typing the medical record of someone you like. Then you are helping them make it incorrect. <VBEG and not at all meant to be ugly, just funny> 
.

Quantcast