Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

Re: Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

Mark Holmes — Tue, 14 Sep 2010 16:23:14 GMT

[quote user="Arlo Guthrie"]I'm still of the opinion that one should use forums (not just this one, ANY forum) only to say things that one would happily stand by in public, and just make sure they are unambiguous, and not open to misinterpretation.[/quote]

I whole heartedly disagree,

Forums (or fora?) are great places to explore ideas and that often means posting an argument which might not necesarily be your opinion to see if has merit. Some form of anonymity helps to encourage debate providing you don't have too many right winged Americans around then things just get silly. (Nothing necessarily wrong with right wing but when combined with American ..... shudder )

Re: Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

Arlo Guthrie — Tue, 14 Sep 2010 15:47:15 GMT

[quote user="Jonathan Kirby"]I'd like to see the forums open only to MRCVS's on the basis of our reg number supplied when we sign up to vetsurgeon.org. Much of what is discussed in the forums could be misinterpreted by people ouside of the profession. [/quote]

Problem with that is any old Tom Dick or Harry can go to the RCVS website and grab a reg number to use!

I'm still of the opinion that one should use forums (not just this one, ANY forum) only to say things that one would happily stand by in public, and just make sure they are unambiguous, and not open to misinterpretation.

But I think we need to keep this in perspective. It isn't like we're discussing matters of state security here. Nor is there any sign of anything other than the very occasional member of the public joining, most of which I think get spotted on the way in, either by me, or by a member of the site, and their accounts cancelled.

Re: Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

Bob Russell — Tue, 14 Sep 2010 15:37:02 GMT

[quote user="Jonathan Kirby"]

Hi Arlo

I'd like to see the forums open only to MRCVS's on the basis of our reg number supplied when we sign up to vetsurgeon.org. Much of what is discussed in the forums could be misinterpreted by people ouside of the profession.

Cheers

Jon

[/quote]

I think most vets will be more guarded in comments and opinions if they feel they may be viewed by non-vets. It is very easy to misinterpret and read more into posts than was intended (as shown by some very heated discussions!).

Re: Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

Jonathan Kirby — Tue, 14 Sep 2010 15:18:53 GMT

Hi Arlo

Cheers

Jon

Re: Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

Wren — Wed, 01 Sep 2010 15:05:40 GMT

[quote user="Michael Woodhouse"]

I feel happier having discussions with fellow professionals under my real name. As I have said if the forum was open to all I would use a pseudonym - as I do elsewhere

[/quote]

I originally joined this forum to clarify a couple of employment issues (CPD and potential pregnancy) that I was unhappy with. I joined under a pseudonym as I wanted some feedback/advice without the risk of my employers being identified on the internet and without the risk of my posts being identified by my employers.

On a clinical front I would be more than happy to speak through my true identity but I think I am braver hiding behind my pseudonym for the above issues. I can assure you than I am a bona fide vet working in mixed practice (equine/farm mostly) in the north of England and I graduated from a Scottish university >10 years ago.

Re: Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

Vikki Halliday LLB — Tue, 31 Aug 2010 23:58:22 GMT

[quote user="Michael Woodhouse"]

I feel happier having discussions with fellow professionals under my real name. As I have said if the forum was open to all I would use a pseudonym - as I do elsewhere.

[/quote]

WHAT? You mean that you are not a cartoon cow called Michael?!!! Damn, and I thought I could line you up with Ermintrude, the cow from the Magic Roundabout! Would have been great for the AI business......

Re: Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

Michael Woodhouse — Tue, 31 Aug 2010 20:24:02 GMT

[quote user="Arlo Guthrie"]Michael, you don't explain why. And I am not sure your suggestion would make any difference. I mean, I already do remove/ban non-vets if I think they don't have a bona-fide reason for membership.[/quote]

I feel happier having discussions with fellow professionals under my real name. As I have said if the forum was open to all I would use a pseudonym - as I do elsewhere.

I can see no place where non vets (and vet students) have contributed to a discussion in any way except in the IDEXX and Ceva subforums. Can't see why we couldn't have an 'industry/pharmaceutical' membership category with access only to that section.

My vote remains for vet only.

Re: Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

Bob Russell — Tue, 31 Aug 2010 12:41:14 GMT

[quote user="Evelyn Barbour-Hill"]

Probably you don't read that kind of newspaper. Kennel floors are a wonderful source of amusement and information.

When I worked for Geoff Parkin, the cleaner (Shirley) would come in during the day, and having washed the floors would spread newspaper over them so that we didn't leave footprints. It was common to see two or three staff coming very slowly up the corridor, bent double as they followed the story.

[/quote]

We went through a stage of getting the Daily Sport given to us - you would be amazed how much 'reading' went on then!!!!

Re: Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Tue, 31 Aug 2010 10:22:22 GMT

[quote user="Arlo Guthrie"]

[quote user="Evelyn Barbour-Hill"]There is certainly a habit among lazy reporters (hardly journalists) of simply looking on "Facebook" (whatever that is) and repeating whatever takes their fancy from there, without asking anyone's permission.[/quote]

I'm amazed. I know BBC journalists are not allowed to do that. They have to verify anything found online, offline, and they have to ask permission.

[/quote]

Probably you don't read that kind of newspaper. Kennel floors are a wonderful source of amusement and information.

Re: Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

Arlo Guthrie — Tue, 31 Aug 2010 08:10:24 GMT

[quote user="Luciano Nebiante"]An easy way can be doing a double check on registration to the forum and to RCVS.[/quote]

Unfortunately, the RCVS register is open to the public, so there is nothing to stop someone visiting the RCVS website and just using any old registration details from there.

[quote user="Matthew Scotter"]how about keeping the membership as it is but when someone starts a topic, or even comments on a topic having a little box at the bottom saying "vet only" so if it were ticked the response or even entire topic was hidden from non-vets?[/quote]

Hi Matthew - even without speaking with my techies, I know that would be a very complex (aka expensive) piece of additional programming. Also, I'd be worried that it would just create the same problem as creating a separate vet-only forum (i.e. it would just kill off the other one(s).

I'm amazed. I know BBC journalists are not allowed to do that. They have to verify anything found online, offline, and they have to ask permission.

Coming back to the question of whether to allow non vets into the forums, the current rule is:

Please note that this is a professional website, and membership is restricted to veterinary surgeons, those working in veterinary practice and those studying to work in veterinary practice.

Registrations will also be accepted from those who work for companies that supply products or services to the veterinary profession.

[quote user="Michael Woodhouse"]Personally I would be much happier if the forum was 100% vet only. It could be a condition of membership. Now if someone claimed to be a vet [falsely] and was found out then they should be banned.[/quote]

Michael, you don't explain why. And I am not sure your suggestion would make any difference. I mean, I already do remove/ban non-vets if I think they don't have a bona-fide reason for membership.

I DO have a solution for this issue that I think everyone could be happy with, but I can't implement it for a little while yet.

The solution is that the site becomes open ONLY to colleagues of existing members of the site. In other words, to become a member, you have to enter the email address of someone else who is a member upon registration.

Not only would this add an additional deterrent, it would be very easy to police. Anyone joining the site will go on another member's 'Colleague' list. If you saw someone on your list that shouldn't be on it, I can remove them from the site.

BUT - this would place a barrier to new memberships, and I don't feel that we have sufficient members yet to start adding barriers. I'd be comfortable doing it when VetSurgeon reaches 10,000 members.

Re: Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 16:39:58 GMT

There is certainly a habit among lazy reporters (hardly journalists) of simply looking on "Facebook" (whatever that is) and repeating whatever takes their fancy from there, without asking anyone's permission. It seems to be common on the local rag. One might surmise that a veterinary local rag will do the same with this forum.

Re: Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

Bob Russell — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 10:58:20 GMT

I do not have any particular issues with the forum as it is!!

Re: Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

Arlo Guthrie — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 10:16:14 GMT

[quote user="Bob Russell"] One way round some of the issues would be to have an ID that was not immediately identifiable to an individual i.e. not use real names. This would be a shame in many ways but perhaps would be appropriate especially when discussing some of the non-clinical issues.

Is it possible to do this?[/quote]

Over my dead body

It would destroy the 'atmosphere' if all the discussions on VetSurgeon were between user1032, user4727 and user4738. Besides which, it would also mean we would have to verify each and every member registration, with all the problems that brings.

[quote user="Sally Everitt"]Hi Arlo,

I realise it is impossible to make any forum secure but would it be possible to make it a condition of membership that anyone quoting something from this site seeks the permission of the poster first. I realise that this is equally difficult to police but if , as in Jane's case, someone is quoted without consent there could be a complaints procedure and repeat offenders could be excluded.

Sally[/quote]

It is already a condition of membership that content is not republished elsewhere. All content posted on VetSurgeon becomes copyright VetSurgeon. I will be following up on the recent case of someone quoting from the site without permission next week, and making sure it doesn't happen again.

I'll reply to points other people have raised a little later...

Re: Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

Arlo Guthrie — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 10:03:11 GMT

[quote user="Tim Cheyne"]On another thread "the end of private practice?" Bob and Katja commented on finding quotes from their posts on search engine results. Personally I don't think that restricting access to 'vet-only' will stop these search engines ferreting out posted comments. It does not seem to do so on other sites including supposedly restricted scientific papers and journals. I am still in favour of leaving 'vetsurgeon' as it is.

Tim.[/quote]

I've replied to Katja's comments on the other thread. In fact, someone else raised this issue some time ago, and we rewrote some of the forum code such that Google can no longer read the content of a forum post. This can take a very long time to apply retrospectively to posts made before the change was made (depends when Google rereads the page).

Meantime, Google will no longer display content from any new posts you make within search results.

Re: Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

Tim Cheyne — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 05:09:06 GMT

On another thread "the end of private practice?" Bob and Katja commented on finding quotes from their posts on search engine results. Personally I don't think that restricting access to 'vet-only' will stop these search engines ferreting out posted comments. It does not seem to do so on other sites including supposedly restricted scientific papers and journals. I am still in favour of leaving 'vetsurgeon' as it is.

Tim.

Re: Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

Michael Woodhouse — Sun, 29 Aug 2010 22:03:07 GMT

[quote user="Jenny Smith"]

Just from a purely selfish point of view.... I am a vet student in my final year at the moment. If a 'vet only' section was to be opened up, then a lot of the reasons I use the forum, i.e. to look at clinical case discussions and to keep up to date with the politics of the vet world would suddenly be off limits to me. I think it would be a shame to exclude non-vets, particularly students from discussions which can be really valuable to us!

Jenny

[/quote]

Jenny - I can only speak for myself but when I said 'vet only' I wholeheartedly included vet students in that!

[:D]

Re: Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

Jenny Smith — Sun, 29 Aug 2010 21:01:13 GMT

Jenny

Re: Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

ms1083 — Sun, 29 Aug 2010 10:02:08 GMT

how about keeping the membership as it is but when someone starts a topic, or even comments on a topic having a little box at the bottom saying "vet only" so if it were ticked the response or even entire topic was hidden from non-vets?

Matthew

Re: Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

Michael Woodhouse — Sat, 28 Aug 2010 21:27:29 GMT

Personally I would be much happier if the forum was 100% vet only. It could be a condition of membership. Now if someone claimed to be a vet [falsely] and was found out then they should be banned. I see no reason why we couldn't have specific areas where selected non-vets could have access - I am thinking the CEVA & IDEXX areas.

Personally I think Emma Cooper has acted abhorrently by quoting posters without their consent. She's gone down a long way in my estimations. If the forum was vet only that wouldn't happen.

I was under the impression that it was just vets and it was on that understanding that I post under my real name. I am a member/moderator of a number of other forums and post elsewhere under an alias.

Re: Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

Niall Taylor — Sat, 28 Aug 2010 21:11:44 GMT

[quote user="Tim Cheyne"]

I am in favour of keeping it as it is, with members using their real names either when posting or in their profiles. I rarely check on anyone's ID but just occasionally it is helpful to know who they are, their location and experience when assessing their comments. Generally there are interesting posts including helpful comments made by members whom I suspect are non-vets (or are in industry; same thing, isn't it?) and I am reluctant to exclude them. For various reasons I am careful about what I publish on this site, especially identifications, but I stand by that which I do. Surely other posters are the same?

Tim.

[/quote]

I agree with Tim and Andy - if it ain't broke, why fix it.

Out of interest, what is the perceived problem with the current arrangement?

Niall

Re: Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

Andrew Kent — Sat, 28 Aug 2010 18:34:21 GMT

I would agree that on the whole I am happy with the current set up, anybody who uses these forums has to accept their comments can end up in the public domain and this is better in terms of restrictions than most! It does concern me slightly about the use of comments without consent - I don't mind that VT reporters are here but would take issue with non-veterinary press being present.

Andy

Re: Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

Tim Cheyne — Sat, 28 Aug 2010 16:52:26 GMT

Tim.

Re: Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

Luciano Nebiante PGCertSAS — Sat, 28 Aug 2010 13:10:38 GMT

Hi all,

I'm almost new in this forum, but I can suggest something if you don't mind.

I think there are some specific topics (not only clinical case) that deserve a professional point of view from

vet community, so it could be a good idea to have some part of the forum vet-only, keeping anyway an open mind.

An easy way can be doing a double check on registration to the forum and to RCVS.

Hopefully I will partecipate more actively to the forum, but actually I'm trying to switch my career to vet practice, so

surely I may need more your help, than you mine.

Luciano

Re: Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

Sally Everitt — Sat, 28 Aug 2010 10:29:12 GMT

Hi Arlo,

Sally

Re: Vet-only forum on VetSurgeon

Bob Russell — Sat, 28 Aug 2010 10:25:36 GMT

I suspect a number of us were of the opinion that this was a vet only (obviously including industry vets etc.).

One way round some of the issues would be to have an ID that was not immediately identifiable to an individual i.e. not use real names. This would be a shame in many ways but perhaps would be appropriate especially when discussing some of the non-clinical issues.

Is it possible to do this?

I like to know who I am dealing with especially when discussing clinical cases. I am not so worried if it is a rant/letting off steam/veterinary politics post.

Having said that I always assume there may be all sorts observing on any forum!!!!!