uptowngirl22 wrote:blowhard wrote:uptowngirl22 wrote:EMZE wrote:sorry if this has already been discussed, but I've been at work all day. Anyone see the ballsy post on the blog regarding options for not causing hysteria? I wonder if they have a way of tracking IP addresses to logins and can find out who that was. Not that it was necessarily outlandish, but I have to believe that 1) they are on or at least lurking this very thread and 2) they did not get an e-mail!
Actually didn't see it until you mentioned it just now. But seriously, that blog comment is kind of correct. The international incident caused by this email has been pretty nutso, and if the email really was just a courtesy, they probably should have just sent it out to everyone and avoided wasting time on this debacle.
This comes up every single year and nothing they do seems to help. Literally every year. In fact, I posted a warning ITT months ago that this e-mail would be coming and asked it to be added to the OP...which it wasn't. Maybe people should stop freaking out so much so they can focus on doing their jobs (accepting/rejecting people) and not worry so much about how every action will be perceived by a million different people under different circumstances? Could they e-mail everyone? Sure, but once they make a decision you get pulled from the stack and added to a different distribution list. (So, to e-mail everyone they would have to e-mail EVERYONE...even people admitted months ago.) They have enough to do without keeping track of every single person individually.
As to tracking the IP...I'm sure ITS can do it but I doubt they care that much.
Also, this is not an international incident. Incident felt by people worldwide ≠ international incident. Violation of the Laws of Nations between states = international incident.
re: the definition of "international incident" - obviously.
I don't think cf means what you think it means. There is no analogy present.