I was very surprised to see a letter of mine headed ‘letter No. 6’ in the April 2 edition of your paper. Not only was it was not intended for publication, but I sent it to you several weeks ago because an earlier letter querying something in an article by one of your regular correspondents had not been printed.
Fortunately, I copied the original letter (No. 4) to the person concerned. A few friendly e-mails between us resolved the matter and the last sentence of the letter you printed ‘And, with respect, the place to do that [i.e. discuss differences of opinion] is in the pages of The Resident, not by private correspondence’ makes more sense.
Editor responds: Perhaps to avoid confusion, you could mark your future correspondence as either for publication or not, accordingly, and we will do our best to oblige.