There have been a few recent examples of personal email conversations being posted online for the world to see.
Now, there is really nothing stopping someone from doing it maliciously but you can take the necessary precautions to simply be as explicit as possible.
Two examples shown here, Seth Godin‘s email signature and Michael Hyatt‘s signature, make it plain as day that these emails are not allowed to be published on blog posts, twitter, etc.
I think this is a great idea and I’m going to add it to my email signature.
What other precautions are you taking to ensure your personal protection from social media?
(And yes, I got permission to post these emails from both of them!)
Wow that never occurred to me,
but I guess that if you have a brand, reputation and and image to maintain you want to be sure that nothing is taken out of context and certainly not made to be in a completely wrong context.
I wish this was not needed, but with recent happenings I definitely see it as a necessity.
Just had an operations meeting with the team here at Our Saviour's and we discussed some things that we wish we didn't have to do but are things that we must do given the state of the world today. I think this is a great idea!
Thanks for the post John.
I work for a large church, our IT dept has setup the exchange server to automatically add a massive disclaimer to each email heading out of our network.
Intrusive? Yes
Ugly? Yes
Effective? Highly.
cool.
What are some of the recent happenings being referred to here?
eh. i hesitate on calling this out…
Interesting approach. I wonder, though, if some users of such a disclaimer would end up with a false sense of security. It's hard to declare all of your messages off the record by default when you're sharing them via an electronic record. Handling this on an as-needed basis would seem to be clearer than relying on fine print.
Also, what about situations where an email is being read through an employer's network? In those cases, the recipient has probably signed an agreement acknowledging the employer has rights to any such traffic.
I can definitely understand the motivation behind such attempts as listed above, I guess the question comes down to the actual effectiveness in producing something that is legally binding….
Just because I receive such a notice in an email does not mean that I actually agree to not divulge such information, I wouldn't but for the sake of the argument. It runs along similar lines to the licenses from MS, that suggest that by opening the product you agree to the license even if you never read it or sign it….
I guess I am just left scratching my head on this one…
So how does this stop someone from using your words? I don't get it. It discourages them against it sure, but they can still do whatever they please.
yeah, it's true, but it just adds another layer.
it also provide some \”legal\” net of sorts I suppose.
nothing's stopping anyone, that's for sure. but, it'll hurt all the same if it comes up.
Can't speak for America but there's nothing legal about these disclaimers in the UK.
They're moral guides at best – but as Tyler said, if someone wants to broadcast the contents of an email then there is nothing stopping the morally ambivalent.