dvbuk55 wrote:Oh no! Not Annex A, that's only a stones throw from the naughty room.vigilante wrote:Well my unit is in annex A, from what I read, which appears typically vague, that it has been agreed but must be part of the 6 phase revision process where we can use the IR framework against it!
Whoa! You'll end up where DGP spends most of his time!vigilante wrote:dvbuk55 wrote:Oh no! Not Annex A, that's only a stones throw from the naughty room.vigilante wrote:Well my unit is in annex A, from what I read, which appears typically vague, that it has been agreed but must be part of the 6 phase revision process where we can use the IR framework against it!
yes we are in the naughty room, where you have to stem the FLOW
by Big Daz » Thu Oct 27, 2011 5:52,pm
Perhaps HQ could have explained what the Indoor Mail Flow Improvement Process was?
Well perhaps you credit them with more intelligence than they possess, in order to explain something you need to understand it - no doubt it will be known as "IMFIP" and will cover a multitude of changes not implicit in the original agreement - which is a familiar scenario after BT2010.Big Daz wrote:Perhaps HQ could have explained what the Indoor Mail Flow Improvement Process was?
I do wonder whats going on,one minute its disagree with this issue at all cost!dvbuk55 wrote:Well perhaps you credit them with more intelligence than they possess, in order to explain something you need to understand it - no doubt it will be known as "IMFIP" and will cover a multitude of changes not implicit in the original agreement - which is a familiar scenario after BT2010.Big Daz wrote:Perhaps HQ could have explained what the Indoor Mail Flow Improvement Process was?
