Gratification

@ghost-of-a-duke said
You should have asked for consent. Everything that followed would have been avoided had you done so.

You should have contacted me rather than the radio station.

@fmf said
If I share it and people get to see what you said, would it be an example of backstabbing?

No. My actions were in direct response to you betraying the trust I had put in you.

I was warned not to contribute my stories and regret not heeding that warning. Any initial enjoyment was wiped out by what followed. It was a thoroughly unpleasant experience.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Seriously, is is not for me to explain GDPR and how it relates to the sharing of personal information without consent.

Have you used your government email illegitimately to try to settle some personal vendetta on any other occasion?

@ghost-of-a-duke said
No. My actions were in direct response to you betraying the trust I had put in you.

Your action should have been to contact me, surely?

@ghost-of-a-duke said
I was warned not to contribute my stories and regret not heeding that warning. Any initial enjoyment was wiped out by what followed. It was a thoroughly unpleasant experience.

I was warned not to contribute my stories and regret not heeding that warning.

Did this contribute to your wheels falling off completely and you doing the most vindictive thing you could think of?

@fmf said
Have you used your government email illegitimately to try to settle some personal vendetta on any other occasion?

I used my work email because that is how the two of us communicated. (When there was trust. - As I wrote the stories on my work laptop during lockdown, so were easier to send from there). It had no relevance to the email I sent. But yes you're right, in retrospect I should have forwarded details to a private email and sent it from there.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
You should have asked for consent. Everything that followed would have been avoided had you done so.

Everything that followed would have been avoided had you done so.

If you'd contacted me I could have taken the second of your Onions out, or used a different silly nom de plume, or replaced it with one of mine. Then you wouldn't have had to go behind my back.

-Removed-

See there you go again with the false assumptions. Please explain why they are any different from the assumption I made about you?

Edit: Good luck with that.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
But yes you're right, in retrospect I should have forwarded details to a private email and sent it from there.

The question is: have you ever used your government email illegitimately for some malicious purpose on any other occasion?

@fmf said
Your action should have been to contact me, surely?

Perhaps if you hadn't have ignored my last two messages.

Your action should have been to ask for consent, surely?

@ghost-of-a-duke said
I used my work email because that is how the two of us communicated. (When there was trust. - As I wrote the stories on my work laptop during lockdown, so were easier to send from there). It had no relevance to the email I sent.

What did the radio station make of a letter that appeared to come from a local government?

@fmf said
The question is: have you ever used your government email illegitimately for some malicious purpose on any other occasion?

No.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Perhaps if you hadn't have ignored my last two messages.

I didn't ignore any emails that warranted action or a reply. You didn't send any email about the the pseudonym I'd used or warning me that you were going to make the ridiculous accusations that you did.

@fmf said
What did the radio station make of a letter that appeared to come from a local government?

It was an email relating to stories submitted by a writer to a show. Why on Earth would my job provide any gravitas. It was clearly a personal matter. I wasn't writing on behalf of the Prime Minister.