Personally I'd just email the person involved and say "I think you've got me confused with someone else". It's an easy enough mistake to make - no need to embarass them further.
Yeah ... but you'd think when the elusive Joanna didn't reply to any of these emails, somebody would have thought to check that they were sending it to the right address!
It could have been a one-off slip and perhaps they are, even at this moment, discussing among themselves what happened to the email that never arrived…
I've had four of the mails in the series. I thought the first one was intriguing spam, the second a clever followup or possibly something more confusing; the last two both arrived today.
I quite like emperor, jiggery_pokery, pseudomonas and anat0010's "other" suggestions. I'd have great difficulty choosing what to do! Have you got a Uni of Cambridge censor stamp handy?
I am amused that all four options were briefly at 12 (50.0%). This inadvertently shows the downside of tickybox polls, and also suggests that there isn't a clear reason to pick one rather than the other. We have been absolutely no help whatsoever.
no subject
Date: 2004-11-18 03:33 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-18 03:35 am (UTC)Yeah ... but you'd think when the elusive Joanna didn't reply to any of these emails, somebody would have thought to check that they were sending it to the right address!
no subject
Date: 2004-11-18 03:56 am (UTC)not quite one-off
Date: 2004-11-18 04:28 am (UTC)Re: not quite one-off
Date: 2004-11-18 08:01 am (UTC)Which of the four was the one exhibited above?
no subject
Date: 2004-11-18 04:23 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-18 03:54 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-18 04:28 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-18 05:49 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-18 08:10 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-18 04:39 am (UTC)Hooray!
no subject
Date: 2004-11-18 09:13 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-18 10:12 am (UTC)Wow, is that a
no subject
Date: 2004-11-26 08:57 am (UTC)