LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 15.5

Help for RECMGMT-L Archives


RECMGMT-L Archives

RECMGMT-L Archives


February 2010, Week 2


Options:

Show Author | Hide Author
Show Table of Contents | Hide Table of Contents
Join or Leave RECMGMT-L
Search Archives


Subject Sorted by Subject, Chronologically

From

Date

Size

ARMA Canada 2010 conference: call for poster sessions

Sheila Taylor <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 10:36:39 -0500

69 lines

ARMA Houston Spring Conference April 27 & 28

Sankey, Pam <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 14:52:55 -0600

72 lines

ARMA Madison Spring Seminar

Sandra Broady-Rudd <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 11:47:02 -0500

39 lines

AUTO: Marlene Diamond is out of the office (returning 02/16/2010)

Marlene Diamond <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 00:08:37 -0500

41 lines

Birmingham Alabama Conference

Alice Young <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 10:48:40 -0500

172 lines

Career Opportunity

Hollow, Damian <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 09:39:28 -0700

111 lines

CARM Retention Module

Kim Mayberry <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 07:24:10 -0500

33 lines

Re: CARM Retention Module

Aiken, Chris <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 08:35:26 -0500

64 lines

Re: CARM Retention Module

Manago, William M <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 09:08:40 -0500

60 lines

Re: CARM Retention Module

Stephen Cohen <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 11:49:22 -0500

46 lines

Central Kansas Spring Seminar March 9th

L Carpenter <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 08:24:21 -0800

32 lines

Certificates of Destruction

Blake Richardson <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 16:26:18 -0700

48 lines

Re: Certificates of Destruction

Ray Davis <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 18:42:12 -0500

57 lines

Re: Certificates of Destruction

Tod Chernikoff <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 23:00:33 -0500

65 lines

Re: Certificates of Destruction

Blake Richardson <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 09:30:38 -0700

91 lines

Re: Certificates of Destruction

Peter Kurilecz <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 11:33:16 -0500

31 lines

CRM Exam - Part 2 - Study Materials

Glenn Fischer <[log in to unmask]>

Mon, 8 Feb 2010 10:22:41 -0500

25 lines

Do You Allow Plants in Your Filerooms?

Effinger, Steven C. <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 08:07:11 -0500

39 lines

Re: Do You Allow Plants in Your Filerooms?

Stephen Cohen <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 09:00:02 -0500

30 lines

Re: Do You Allow Plants in Your Filerooms?

Larry Medina <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 06:28:43 -0800

34 lines

Re: Do You Allow Plants in Your Filerooms?

Barbara Wyton <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 11:17:04 -0500

27 lines

Email Marketing Campaign for Broker Dealers

Rob Giganti <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 18:03:06 -0800

29 lines

Email Marketing Campaign for Broker Dealers

Rob Giganti <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 18:47:47 -0500

35 lines

Re: Email Marketing Campaign for Broker Dealers

sasha babin <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 16:21:45 -0800

45 lines

Re: Email Marketing Campaign for Broker Dealers

[log in to unmask]

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 00:49:18 +0000

34 lines

Re: Email Marketing Campaign for Broker Dealers

Peter Kurilecz <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 21:32:44 -0500

36 lines

Re: Email Marketing Campaign for Broker Dealers

Rob Giganti <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 18:51:31 -0800

38 lines

Re: Email Marketing Campaign for Broker Dealers

[log in to unmask]

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 02:53:50 +0000

19 lines

Re: Email Marketing Campaign for Broker Dealers

Grevin, Fred <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 21:58:22 -0500

14 lines

Re: Email Marketing Campaign for Broker Dealers

Peter Kurilecz <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 23:00:49 -0500

36 lines

Re: Email Marketing Campaign for Broker Dealers

Tod Chernikoff <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 08:33:27 -0500

68 lines

Re: Email Marketing Campaign for Broker Dealers

Larry Medina <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 11:46:34 -0500

58 lines

how to keep digital records permanently

Mckeage, Anne <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 13:21:52 -0500

41 lines

Re: how to keep digital records permanently

Bernard Chester <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 12:28:15 -0800

76 lines

Identifying Vital Records / Prioritizing Business Groups

Kidd, Colin <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 10:15:29 -0500

46 lines

Job Post US-IL-Mettawa (Chicago area) Corporate Archivist

Peter Kurilecz <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 11:50:20 -0500

27 lines

Re: Job Post US-NJ-Princeton UNIVERSITY RECORDS MANAGER CRM preferred

Paula Johnson <[log in to unmask]>

Mon, 8 Feb 2010 14:43:34 -0800

230 lines

Job Post US-TX-Plano Document Controls Mgr CRM desired

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 08:58:41 -0500

26 lines

Job Post-US-IL-Schaumburg: Records Management Summer Internship Available

Patrick Cunningham <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:44:05 -0800

54 lines

Julie Colgan highlighted

John Annunziello <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 10:29:00 -0500

53 lines

Re: Law firm records from a bankruptcy trustee

Julie J. Colgan <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 17:41:47 -0500

55 lines

Long term e-records review

James Mullen <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 23:25:46 -0500

32 lines

Re: Long term e-records review

Jesse Wilkins <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 21:33:54 -0700

27 lines

Re: Long term e-records review

Stephen Cohen <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 11:09:54 -0500

43 lines

Re: Long term e-records review

Larry Medina <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 11:45:25 -0500

86 lines

Re: Long term e-records review

Larry Medina <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 17:24:19 -0500

21 lines

Re: Long term e-records review

Mullen, James L <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 08:23:49 -0600

42 lines

Re: Long term e-records review

Wayne Finlaison <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 18:40:14 -0800

68 lines

One comprehensive Information Policy or multiple focused policies?

Nolene Sherman <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 22:25:48 -0800

49 lines

Re: One comprehensive Information Policy or multiple focused policies?

Grevin, Fred <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 07:06:56 -0500

30 lines

Re: One comprehensive Information Policy or multiple focused policies?

Peter Kurilecz <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 08:59:16 -0500

50 lines

Re: One comprehensive Information Policy or multiple focused policies?

John Annunziello <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 08:54:17 -0500

54 lines

Re: One comprehensive Information Policy or multiple focused policies?

Julie J. Colgan <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 10:19:14 -0500

58 lines

Re: One comprehensive Information Policy or multiple focused policies?

Peter Kurilecz <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 10:29:42 -0500

44 lines

Re: One comprehensive Information Policy or multiple focused policies?

Terry Mergele <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 08:47:50 -0800

41 lines

Re: One comprehensive Information Policy or multiple focused policies?

Larry Medina <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 12:07:58 -0500

41 lines

Re: One comprehensive Information Policy or multiple focused policies?

Jesse Wilkins <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 10:18:53 -0700

26 lines

Re: One comprehensive Information Policy or multiple focused policies?

Christine Figueroa <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 09:56:20 -0800

98 lines

Re: One comprehensive Information Policy or multiple focused policies?

Munzer, Tom <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:19:08 -0500

23 lines

Re: One comprehensive Information Policy or multiple focused policies?

Sharon Burnett <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 12:24:15 -0800

39 lines

Re: One comprehensive Information Policy or multiple focused policies?

Laurie Carpenter <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 18:19:25 -0500

34 lines

Re: One comprehensive Information Policy or multiple focused policies?

Tod Chernikoff <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 18:39:49 -0500

74 lines

Re: One comprehensive Information Policy or multiple focused policies?

Maureen Cusack <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 16:20:41 -0800

108 lines

Re: One comprehensive Information Policy or multiple focused policies?

sasha babin <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 17:22:29 -0800

33 lines

QUestion for school RMs--Exceptional Student Education Records

robin tew <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 09:55:54 -0800

41 lines

Re: QUestion for school RMs--Exceptional Student Education Records

Tod Chernikoff <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 13:14:13 -0500

74 lines

QUestion for school RMs--Exceptional Student Education Records

Lucy <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 08:38:08 -0500

69 lines

Re: Question on Retention Period (Active Records & Semi-Active)

Lisa Pottle <[log in to unmask]>

Mon, 8 Feb 2010 09:42:15 -0700

126 lines

RAIN 20100214

Peter Kurilecz <[log in to unmask]>

Sun, 14 Feb 2010 21:50:28 -0500

459 lines

RAINDrop - Construction worker confesses in Cologne archive collapse case

Bruce White <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 12:18:48 -0800

33 lines

Re: RAINDrop - Construction worker confesses in Cologne archive collapse case

Graves, Mark <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 15:17:26 -0600

25 lines

Re: RAINDrop - Construction worker confesses in Cologne archive collapse case

Jesse Wilkins <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 15:07:41 -0700

33 lines

Re: RAINDrop - Construction worker confesses in Cologne archive collapse case

Peter Kurilecz <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 17:08:19 -0500

48 lines

Re: RAINDrop - Construction worker confesses in Cologne archive collapse case

Peter Kurilecz <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 17:12:23 -0500

31 lines

Re: RAINDrop - Construction worker confesses in Cologne archive collapse case

Peter Kurilecz <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 17:22:47 -0500

50 lines

Re: RAINDrop - Construction worker confesses in Cologne archive collapse case

Stephen Cohen <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 12:37:33 -0500

34 lines

RAINDrop - EHR adoption timeline too aggressive

Bruce White <[log in to unmask]>

Mon, 8 Feb 2010 13:48:23 -0800

27 lines

RAINDrop - Google Adds 'Buzz' to Gmail

Bruce White <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 12:41:25 -0800

38 lines

RAINDrop - Health care department breaches privacy

Bruce White <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 09:14:33 -0800

29 lines

RAINDrop - Info on UTMB patients may have been compromised

Bruce White <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 11:10:54 -0800

28 lines

RAINdrop 8 Ways IT Politics Can Wreck a SharePoint Project - Digital Landfill

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 22:55:24 -0500

15 lines

RAINdrop Audit of Court System challenged

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Sun, 14 Feb 2010 22:42:55 -0500

14 lines

RAINdrop Case Law and Text Messages

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 22:58:15 -0500

14 lines

RAINdrop Copiers: Gold Mines for Identity Theft - CBS News

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Mon, 8 Feb 2010 22:58:18 -0500

15 lines

Re: RAINdrop Copiers: Gold Mines for Identity Theft - CBS News

Trudy M Phillips <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 08:53:31 EST

39 lines

Re: RAINdrop Copiers: Gold Mines for Identity Theft - CBS News

Peter Kurilecz <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 08:58:37 -0500

31 lines

Re: RAINdrop Copiers: Gold Mines for Identity Theft - CBS News

Larry Medina <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 10:33:24 -0500

46 lines

RAINdrop Court finds requested ESI inaccessible because of high cost and that requests are a “fishing expedition” : Electronic Discovery Blog

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 21:41:39 -0500

17 lines

Re: RAINdrop Court finds requested ESI inaccessible because of high cost and that requests are a “fishing expedition” : Electronic Discovery Blog

Larry Medina <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 20:00:21 -0800

32 lines

RAINdrop Court Orders Adverse Inference for Spoliation of Data on Handheld Devices : Electronic Discovery Law

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 22:59:45 -0500

15 lines

RAINdrop Court Orders Producing Party to "Unlock" PDF

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Sun, 14 Feb 2010 22:40:58 -0500

14 lines

RAINdrop Data Underload #8 Unsolicited | FlowingData

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Mon, 8 Feb 2010 22:30:10 -0500

18 lines

RAINdrop Didn't know the data would be needed

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Sun, 14 Feb 2010 12:22:03 -0500

29 lines

RAINdrop E-Discovery Case Report 8211; Is everything enough?

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Mon, 8 Feb 2010 22:16:57 -0500

14 lines

RAINdrop Employee Misuse of Computer Access Ruled Not a Crime

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 22:18:59 -0500

14 lines

RAINdrop FBI still wants two years of ISP Web logs

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Mon, 8 Feb 2010 23:06:39 -0500

14 lines

RAINdrop How to Move Large SharePoint Document Libraries

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 22:31:58 -0500

14 lines

RAINdrop Is This the Year of Legal Hold?

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 22:32:56 -0500

14 lines

RAINdrop Legal Holds After 'Pension Committee'

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 22:31:18 -0500

14 lines

RAINdrop Microsoft’s Cloud Computing Initiative: An Opportunity to Advance International Ediscovery?

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Mon, 8 Feb 2010 22:15:50 -0500

15 lines

RAINdrop Officer accessed police data to prey on women

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 22:57:25 -0500

14 lines

RAINdrop Old Archiving System Reasonably Accessible

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 16:30:36 -0500

17 lines

RAINdrop Ontario's New Rules of Civil Procedure Address Electronic Discovery

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 23:02:18 -0500

15 lines

RAINdrop Recent Cases EDiscovery Cases and Opinions

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 22:37:20 -0500

15 lines

RAINdrop Rodriguez-Torres v. Gov’t Dev. Bank of Puerto Rico

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 22:43:35 -0500

15 lines

RAINdrop Sanctions Issued - Failure to Preserve and Legal Hold

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 22:41:50 -0500

14 lines

RAINdrop Seventh Circuit Ediscovery Pilot Program powerpoint slides

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 23:20:29 -0500

15 lines

RAINdrop Shattering Your Implicit Cost Assumptions for Information Governance

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Mon, 8 Feb 2010 22:26:02 -0500

15 lines

RAINdrop Shedding light on images in the public domain &laquo; Everybody&#039;s Libraries

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Mon, 8 Feb 2010 22:27:32 -0500

17 lines

RAINdrop Social Media: The Next Frontier in e-Discovery (Part 2)

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 22:22:01 -0500

14 lines

RAINdrop The First Legal Shot Across the Web 2.0 Bow?

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 22:45:09 -0500

14 lines

RAINdrop Underappreciated social networking tools

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 22:56:14 -0500

14 lines

RAINdrop Web Searches Serve as a Litigation Tool

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 22:29:59 -0500

14 lines

RAINdrop Writing off the UK's last palaeographer |Education |The Guardian

Peter Kurilecz <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 08:51:06 -0500

34 lines

RAINdrop Writing off the UK's last palaeographer |Education |The Guardian

Peter Kurilecz <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 08:51:06 -0500

38 lines

Re: RAINdrop Zubulake (long response)

Jesse Wilkins <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 12:45:49 -0700

52 lines

Re: RAINdrop Zubulake (long response)

Peter Kurilecz <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 15:39:20 -0500

59 lines

Re: RAINdrop Zubulake (long response)

Dan Jones <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 20:46:10 +0000

33 lines

Re: RAINdrop Zubulake (long response)

Martin Tuip <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 16:22:19 -0800

31 lines

Re: RAINdrop Zubulake (Short Repsonse)

Hugh Smith <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 04:10:40 -0500

57 lines

RAINdrop Zubulake RErevisited Second thoughts about backup tapes?

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Mon, 8 Feb 2010 22:17:47 -0500

14 lines

Re: RAINdrop Zubulake RErevisited Second thoughts about backup tapes?

Larry Medina <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 10:56:17 -0500

51 lines

Re: RAINdrop Zubulake RErevisited Second thoughts about backup tapes?

Jesse Wilkins <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 10:21:46 -0700

59 lines

Re: RAINdrop Zubulake RErevisited Second thoughts about backup tapes?

Larry Medina <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 14:03:09 -0500

149 lines

RAINdrop:New York State Rules that Electronic Discovery Production Costs Must Be Borne by Producing Party

PeterK <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 22:20:26 -0500

15 lines

Re: RAINdrop:New York State Rules that Electronic Discovery Production Costs Must Be Borne by Producing Party

Larry Medina <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 20:03:26 -0800

28 lines

Records Center Software

Richard G. King <[log in to unmask]>

Mon, 8 Feb 2010 08:56:29 -0700

23 lines

records management workshop

Metzer, Laren <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 07:05:30 -0800

53 lines

records management workshop

Metzer, Laren <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 07:05:30 -0800

51 lines

Reminder: Register for "Preserving the Memory of the World" March 12th @ UBC

amanda <[log in to unmask]>

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 16:57:20 -0800

56 lines

Resending: Records Center Software

Richard G. King <[log in to unmask]>

Mon, 8 Feb 2010 09:46:48 -0700

65 lines

Retention Schedule Review: Proposal

Corona, Jamie <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 09:22:51 -0500

61 lines

Re: Retention Schedule Review: Proposal

Peter Kurilecz <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 09:32:27 -0500

34 lines

Re: Retention Schedule Review: Proposal

John Annunziello <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 09:31:30 -0500

64 lines

Re: Retention Schedule Review: Proposal

Julie J. Colgan <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 09:51:38 -0500

56 lines

Re: Retention Schedule Review: Proposal

Stephen Cohen <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 13:00:14 -0500

39 lines

Segregation filing cabinet

Joan Brunning-Symons <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 14:06:59 -0600

22 lines

Shredding and offsite storage--same vendor?

Johnson Jr., Earl <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 17:41:20 -0500

43 lines

Re: Shredding and offsite storage--same vendor?

McLallen, David <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 15:46:20 -0700

74 lines

Re: Shredding and offsite storage--same vendor?

Nystedt, Sheri <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 15:55:34 -0700

67 lines

Re: Shredding and offsite storage--same vendor?

Tom Wilson <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 17:12:37 -0600

104 lines

Re: Shredding and offsite storage--same vendor?

Bruce White <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 15:31:39 -0800

50 lines

Re: Shredding and offsite storage--same vendor?

Beverly Harris <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 17:43:48 -0600

35 lines

Re: Shredding and offsite storage--same vendor?

Tom Wilson <[log in to unmask]>

Tue, 9 Feb 2010 18:09:59 -0600

48 lines

Re: Shredding and offsite storage--same vendor?

Stephen Cohen <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 08:41:43 -0500

38 lines

Re: Shredding and offsite storage--same vendor?

Peter Kurilecz <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 10:27:06 -0500

37 lines

Re: Shredding and offsite storage--same vendor?

Stephen Cohen <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 11:34:47 -0500

37 lines

Re: Shredding and offsite storage--same vendor?

Pilar McAdam <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 08:53:39 -0800

51 lines

Re: Shredding and offsite storage--same vendor?

Lorinda Kasten-Lowerre <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 11:33:48 -0800

32 lines

Re: Shredding and offsite storage--same vendor?

Tom Wilson <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 14:02:36 -0600

44 lines

Shredding and offsite storage--same vendor? (follow-up)

Johnson Jr., Earl <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 09:17:59 -0500

44 lines

Re: Shredding and offsite storage--same vendor? (follow-up)

Tom Wilson <[log in to unmask]>

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 14:06:59 -0600

70 lines

Subject: Re: Long term e-records review

Hugh Smith <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 11:19:56 -0500

48 lines

Re: Subject: Re: Long term e-records review

sasha babin <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 09:31:12 -0800

35 lines

Re: Subject: Re: Long term e-records review

Peter Kurilecz <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 12:39:33 -0500

33 lines

TRIM 6.2 - would like to discuss implementation issues

<Sara Janes> <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 14:02:32 -0500

54 lines

Visitor Registers

Jeanne Callen <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 08:25:54 -0600

30 lines

Re: Visitor Registers

Larry Medina <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 11:15:21 -0500

39 lines

Re: Visitor Registers

Julie Fleming <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 14:45:28 -0500

93 lines

Re: Visitor Registers

Jeanne Callen <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 13:54:54 -0600

34 lines

Well done article by Mimi Dionne

Hilliard, Mary <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 13:48:54 -0800

24 lines

Re: Well done article by Mimi Dionne

Mimi Dionne <[log in to unmask]>

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 18:08:42 -0800

37 lines


Back to: Main RECMGMT-L Page



LISTS.UFL.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager