The helpdesk thread

tallaght01

Hi folks.

There's a thread over on hekpdesk complaining about the moderation here.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055594630

It's not a drama, and I'm always happy to answer questions. But I'm presumabbly going to have to give this guy some kind of an answer shortly. I really just represent the users here, so I wanted to get your views on the threads he started, to work out if I went wrong, and to find out if we need to allow these types of threads.

You'll see the two locked threads above. They're about doctors being money mad. Now, I have some kind of a rapport with the docs on here, and I thought he was just being inflammatory. I don't think there was any substance to what he wrote. It just seemed like a rant to me. I don't think the regulars on here should have to defend themselves from some kind of a default position of just being interested in money.

I have no desire to shield the profession from criticism, but I thought this was trolling, and stereotyping. IN short, I didn't think any kid of reasonable discussion was going to come from this.

I messaged him and told him that the guys who post here work hard for their patients, and we have a high proportion of docs in the less glamorous side of medicine, who shouldn't have to defend themselves against accusations that are not relevant to them. then he went and re-posted anyway.

BUt if the community wants to allow threads like this, then tell me. I'm more than happy to be told by you guys that I'm wrong. Unfortunately, only the mods of the forums in questions get to post in feedback. But this isn't about me, and I wanted to get your opinions before I go re-opening threads.

Thanks as always.

T01

Mena

I'd say let him post. It's not like it will be difficult to defend the position of high charges anyway. Maybe he'll learn something.

If I spent that long studying and showed the commitment I know it requires to be a medical professional, I'd charge an arm and a leg as well!

So long as it doesn't descend into a trolling match, I can't see the harm. But then, I'm only an avid lurker here so take my opinion with that proverbial pinch of salt.

detriment

While I accept that the language in the first thread may have been a little provocative, I moderated it in the second thread. I think this is an interesting topic of discussion. There was a report out a few years ago claiming that half the reason for inflation after the introduction of the euro was because of doctors raising charges without justification. I've dealt a bit with doctors in the last couple of years, and I've felt they bled me dry - EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM. To suggest that this is not an acceptable discussion topic in a medicine forum, when it is arguably the number issue related to medicine discussed by the general public, is ridiculous.

tallaght01

detriment wrote: »

While I accept that the language in the first thread may have been a little provocative, I moderated it in the second thread. I think this is an interesting topic of discussion. There was a report out a few years ago claiming that half the reason for inflation after the introduction of the euro was because of doctors raising charges without justification. I've dealt a bit with doctors in the last couple of years, and I've felt they bled me dry - EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM. To suggest that this is not an acceptable discussion topic in a medicine forum, when it is arguably the number issue related to medicine discussed by the general public, is ridiculous.

Well, i sort of assumed you thought I should allow your thread :P

Interesting topic of conversation, and one we've had before. But your language is wayy too inflammatory.

I just don't see how this will be anything but you telling us how greedy we are.

BUt I was more looking for opinions from people who didn't write the offending thread, in fairness )

Gazza22

I agree with you and i would have locked the threads too, especially the first one. Both threads are basically a rant, with the first one being totally inflammatory.

I don't believe threads like these have a place on Bio&Med as it takes away the spirit of the forum. Besides there is countless other places on boards they are suited to.

RobFowl

I'd say let him rant away but as was said probably on a different forum. There is a ranting and raving one I believe.

samson09

tallaght01 wrote: »

There's a thread over on hekpdesk complaining about the moderation here.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055594630

Cue Victor Meldrew.


"I don't believe it!"

The guy does have a fair point.

GuanYin

IF your thread is locked, PM the mod, discuss why and ask permission to post in a way that suits their guidelines.

As I've told the B&M mods, I believe it is a valid topic of discussion, but the caveat to that is that it most be discussed respectfully.

On the other hand, here, we are moderators first.

nesf

I'd have locked the thread and told the user to either take it to AH if they just want to have a rant (nothing wrong with that, this is just not the forum for it) or to sit back and come up with some cogent points or questions and start a new thread seeking to learn why charges are so high for GPs etc (assuming the user actually wants to know these things). There's nothing wrong with having a good rant but one has to pick the correct forum, AH allows for simple ranting without being challenged to back up statements or to argue from more than just anecdotal points, this forum is more about informed argument and as such isn't in my view the correct place for a rant especially considering that said rant would find a lot more support among non-medical people since we're the ones allegedly being "ripped off" here.

sam34

these threads crop up on various fora every so often - consumer issues, humanities etc. they even turn up on AH in typical AH sensationalist "i used a service but i dont think i should have to pay for it" outrage.

to be fair, i suppose a lot of people dont get the concept/purpose of paying for repeat prescriptions, or why it is necessary to see a GP (and pay for it) prior to referral to a specialist. and i think it's OK to allow discussion/explanation of those issues.

but, the blatant insulting, stigmatising, inflammatory, accusatory, ignorant and inaccurate ranting as in the OP here should not, imo, be tolerated.

lets have a summary of some of the language used:

overpaid
ridiculous
obsessed
disgusted
scammed
exorbitant
cosy system
"extorting"

...... plus the insinuation that doctors are over prescribing expensive drugs to the detriment of their patients, for their own financial gain.

it is insulting, to say the least, and has no place on the bio+med forum, imo.
as i said, a reasonable enquiry would be fine, but this ranting/venting and blatant trolling shouldn't be condoned.

Random

From the charter

This Forum is for all who enjoy and/or are interested in the Biomedical Sciences.

This doesn't really cover the fees doctors charge etc? Perhaps the guys thread is better suited to Consumer Issues or something?

Forgive me if I'm way off ... seen this thread on the front page and sorta just whizzed in and now I'm whizzing out
Just my two uneducated cent.

GuanYin

The forum has grown and changed a little from the time the charter was written.

Charters are guidelines, nothing more.

Gazza22

GuanYin wrote: »

As I've told the B&M mods, I believe it is a valid topic of discussion, but the caveat to that is that it most be discussed respectfully.

GuanYin wrote: »

The forum has grown and changed a little from the time the charter was written.

Charters are guidelines, nothing more.

Granted but i really don't think Bio&Med is the right platform on boards for this type of discussion when there are other, more suited forums. All i see from the OP is a rant and an attempt to troll this forum by irritating the medics who are present here.

sam34

GuanYin wrote: »

The forum has grown and changed a little from the time the charter was written.

Charters are guidelines, nothing more.

i would have thought they were more than guidelines - people get banned form fora all the time for posting things which are "against the charter", which would indicate they contain rules rather than guidelines?

GuanYin

sam34 wrote: »

i would have thought they were more than guidelines - people get banned form fora all the time for posting things which are "against the charter", which would indicate they contain rules rather than guidelines?

You're misunderstanding. They're guidelines insofar as they aren't all encompassing.

charlieroot

I don't think that this topic should be banned from the forum. However, the tone of the post as mentioned was very inflammatory. Little more than a rant.

OP, if you want to start such a discussion - how about starting with what you think a GP (for example ) should charge for a consultation. Please justify this price with estimates of costs and take into account what you think a highly trained, experienced and hard working professional with a lot of responsibility should be paid. Please take into account the sacrifices that the doctor has made to fulfill their training requirements both financial and personal.

In most cases I found people who have a problem with the fees doctor's charge:
a) do not understand where the money is going - i.e. the expenses involved.
b) have never made a fully informed comparison with what other professional charge
c) think that there straight forward and quick consultation which takes minimal effort is a typical one.

Alternatively, they just want to rant - be it for jealously reasons, bitterness or because they have an entitlement attitude when it comes to healthcare.

My two cents.

angeldelight

I wouldn't have an issue with it either being allowed or not allowed but words such as those highlighted by a poster above which were used by the OP were also used when discussing pharmacists and the amount they get paid in more than 1 thread on the board... none of which were locked or discouraged apart from when it became a little too personal. What's good for the goose...

Bottle_of_Smoke

Didn't see the thread.

Think the discussion is ok, doctors here but it's not a doctors forum

but Doctors here shouldn't have to put up with being tarred with the same brush so if the OP was being bitchy to individual posters he should have got infracted

Edit: Ok seen the threads, the first was out of order because he implied every doctor is obsessed with money, which is ridiculous.

The second post, although a bit ignorant, I think was ok. I would have responded with reasons why GPs charge so much and how the prescription charges was a government issue and irrelevant.

I think the second thread should be unlocked

Traumadoc

Plus consultants have never gone on strike.

ZorbaTehZ

References to "get the regulars views", "group of docs on here" etc. eschews a cliquishness quite frankly. Whether someone posts in this forum once versus someone who posts solely here should be meaningless.

Notwithstanding the above, what about replying to those closed threads rationally, coolly and clearly instead of shutting the door so quickly (and abruptly)?

tallaght01

ZorbaTehZ wrote: »

References to "get the regulars views", "group of docs on here" etc. eschews a cliquishness quite frankly. Whether someone posts in this forum once versus someone who posts solely here should be meaningless.

I think that's taking it a bit far, in fairness. The reason i talked about the docs on here is because they were the ones being attacked, and were the ones this guy was asking to defend the position of doctors.
As a lot of people have seen, this is not about the topic. It's about the language used. We have discussed doctors' charges here before. I was even the one who started the thread :P

BUt lets do it in a non confrontational way.

Just to give you an idea of what i thought we were in for, have a look at the Detriment's last contribution to Bio+med.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055475288

I stand by the assertion that this guy isn't here for involved, adult discussion. I'll wait for DrIndy to give me his views before we decide what to do.

Thanks for the input guys, as always.

finty

CRANK!!!!


Read this guys post on his erasmus year in Italy, its pretty special.

tallaght01

angeldelight wrote: »

I wouldn't have an issue with it either being allowed or not allowed but words such as those highlighted by a poster above which were used by the OP were also used when discussing pharmacists and the amount they get paid in more than 1 thread on the board... none of which were locked or discouraged apart from when it became a little too personal. What's good for the goose...

Also, can you PM me with those links. I've not seen the posts you've talked about. But I'm happy to deal with them, just not on this thread. Cheers.

finty

tallaght01 wrote: »

Also, can you PM me with those links. I've not seen the posts you've talked about. But I'm happy to deal with them, just not on this thread. Cheers.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055508872

Dentists!

tallaght01

finty wrote: »

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055508872

Dentists!

Yea, I'd look at his previous posts before deciding to lock things up. That dentist post was edited by the moderator to remove the bit where he told the patient to ignore their dentist's advice, too!

tallaght01

GuanYin wrote: »

On the other hand, here, we are moderators first.

I think the implication that I was something else here is way out. I don't charge patients, so it's nothing to do with me.

But if you take time to look at his old posts, coupled with wanting to protect our users from an argument that was never reasonable or rational at the start, then it puts a different slant on it.

I would like to think that the regular posters on here know me well enough to know this wasn't some kind of protectionist move!!!!

GuanYin

Well regular posters and readers

For instance, I read EVERY science category post (eventually).

I wasn't suggesting here that you were modding from personal PoV, I was suggesting that it could appear like that to some.

The language was rude and on a grumpier day I may have been draconian, but in the end I would suggest that we facilitate the discussions people want as much as common sense permits.

While I don't want this forum to be viewed the way some people view Dental Issues (for instance - that is, a place to air their anger at dentists and the dentists who mod and post there), I do think that this forum, especially if we split it, will have *some* of those types of posts. A middle ground would be ideal.

tallaght01

Look, I'm happy for DrIndy to have the casting mod vote. No problem with that. It's not the Tallaght01 show.

But to reiterate:

A) I have zero problem with the topic. My socialists rants have always been aired here. I'm a strong advocate for free health for all. I would love a sensible discussion on fee-for-health issues. But in my opinion, this was an attack.

If it's re-opened I'm not moderating it. DrIndy can take the baton from me in that regard :P

It looks to me from this thread, that most people don't want it here. But the other mods can look after it if they want. No drama at this end if you want to.

GuanYin

Whoa.... I wasn't suggesting an override of your call. I was merely stating my "ideal forum" view. I think we've crossed wires here! DrIndy doesn't need to cast a vote because there is nothing to vote on

Regarding your points:

A) I'm a republican and fiscal conservative but I strongly believe in free health care. No, I don't believe in free health care, I believe in medical treatment as a basic human right.

I could probably go to jail for centuries with the amount of medical insurance fraud I've committed just to sleep at night

The systems are broken in my view but I think I'd like to tell people why and how and hear what they expect vs what can be achieved.

I don't think that thread should be re-opened even with a change of heart by you. I merely suggest, if the poster or another wants to discuss the topic in an open, non confrontational and informative way, I think it would be a good thing.

I'm not even sure I'm wearing my mod hat here

Sorry if I came across like I was attacking you, long day, galactic senate, fear of being sued by the EPL etc etc. No excuse, I'm supposed to be better than that. Apologies.

MrCreosote

Totally agree with locking it myself.
Does he have a point in there somewhere- definitely.
Was it trolling- almost certainly.

DrIndy

I do not think the thread should be reopened.

I concur with the initial closing of the thread and object greatly to the reposting to get around the thread closure for the following reasons:

1) The thread is purely inflammatory - it is designed to incite inflammatory replies
2) There is no question that is asked or reasonable topic to debate - we have debated it before and reasons why charges exist - ie we have private GP service because there is no government funding for universal healthcare.
3) The thread is very poorly thought out and is for the most part based on falacy as has been pointed out by other posters.
4) The behaviour of the poster is very akin to trolling - and the classical triad of thread closure - protest reposting and then trip to helpdesk to generate more furore was instituted. One thing that was not done in this classical path was to ban him - this would normally happen on any other forum (we don't do that often - reflecting an open policy we try to promote). Apart from this it is a scene repeated often before across boards for years and normally results in a site wide ban.
5) Investigating the post history of detriment shows that he post inflammatory messages for a response a significant minority of times on boards.
6) This IS trolling by one of the definitions of boards which is posting something in a forum for the sole purpose of upsetting the natives.

Regarding the moderator decision by Tallaght01 - I would have locked it too - but may have left it 24 hours to allow the users here to categorically face down unsubstantiated inflammatory remarks with fact first. However, considering the wave on alternative health threads which provoked a lot of ire with the forum users - I can clearly see the mechanism of thought which resulted in him going for immediate closure - after all its more of the same just on a different topic.

As moderators - we try to act as guardians of the forum rather than rulers - and try to follow what the users want rather than simply deciding the rules as we go along. I think the users have spoken but think this thread should remain open for a short time more to allow more opinions on this topic.

Angeldelight - I accept your point and i think we should take a much harsher stance on people posting here simply to attack professions represented.

I do propose though that this is a warning to Detriment on what can and cannot be debated here (as was pointed out - there is a ranting and raving forum for unsubstantiated rants and consumer issues for more thought out concerns regarding value for money). This is not the correct forum.

I therefore propose that detriment should be issued with this as a final warning and further posts of this nature should result in a lengthy ban from the forum.

DrIndy

tallaght01

Many thanks for the feedback. I wasn't being defensive at all about it. I genuinely believe that if the other mods think I'm wrong they should have the ability to overrule me.

But at least it's all sorted now. Alls well that ends well. I'm sure detriment is probably loving the fact that he's caused a bit of a storm.

Thanks again for the opinions as always

tallaght01

MrCreosote wrote: »

Totally agree with locking it myself.
Does he have a point in there somewhere- definitely.
Was it trolling- almost certainly.

just saw this, and i think it sums up my position nicely.

Dr Galen

If you look across to how politics forum works, these type of ranty shouty threads often come up. The rule the guys over there seem to run with (GY included) is that if you want to rant, go get a blog. If you want to make a point, ask some questions or promote discussion then let it roll, within reason obviously. Works pretty well over there for the most part and it seems that this was the kind of line that was taken here as well. One which I'd be in total support of.

Lack of communication between the mods and the general users of this site is something that comes up as a bugbear quite often via feedback and the like, the way in which the mods of this forum engage with the populace is pretty cool, long may it last