Home The Book Dr Articles Products Message Boards Journal Articles Search Our Surveys Surgery ESWT Dr Messages Find Good Drs video

That's fine with me ScottR

Posted by marie on 9/27/03 at 17:55 (131307)

I think that people come here to yak for a variety of reasons. Mostly it should be a place that we can share and support. I went back through some posts and I do seem to recall that we had decided to try not to make so many political posts. I think we have fallen into some bad habits and it's time to rethink why we all come to the boards. The social board isn't a place to fuel ideology or debate of any kind conservative or liberal. We can choose to go elsewhere. I just think this has become a convinient stop for many.

For myself I'll talk to anyone about anything. The distraction keeps me from dwelling on the pain. We have recently had some nice discussions about cameras and collecting and such. I hope that we can put this to sleep. I'm sure there are plenty of topics you guys can talk about without involving politics. Aside from that if I want to talk about politics I can email friends or go else where.

A hot topics board really doesn't have anything to do with heelspurs. I would suggest that those who want a hot topics board reach into their pockets and hire someone to create it. Thanks D Thomas for your kind offer.

As much as I enjoy yaking with the guys about politics....I mostly miss the simple fun posts that were here when I first came to the board. And for me....if any of you male or female have some down and dirty recipes for working couples I'd be glad to hear them.

Now does anyone have any cool topics for discussion? Be serious now!

best wishes marie

Re: That's fine with me ScottR

Ed Davis, DPM on 9/27/03 at 18:10 (131312)

marie:

Anyone can launch into a discussion about any topic they please here. There are times that current events play a big role in our lives as we just got through the anniversary of 9-11 and many of us have friends and family involved in the current military conflict. I think that the subject matter will wax and wane with the situations that affect us.
We will be entering into a national election next year and again, it will be a time of increased political activity.

We can enjoy discussing a wide variety of topics among friends and I would like to consider you one. I cannot do so with those like Carole who have launched personal attacks for no reason other than disagreement on certain issues. Yes, we are discussing a new topic here, one of procedure and policy but it really astounds me that some insist on going to attack mode in place of engaging in a rational discussion.
Ed

Re: That's fine with me ScottR

marie on 9/27/03 at 18:33 (131317)

Well Ed,

I think of you as a friend too. You have been there for me when I needed both physical and emotional support. But I think because we are entering a politically turbulant time....we may need to take a rest form politics. I have tried to put myself in the others shoes and I think that really want to just hang out a bit. The nature of this board is the thread. It can visually look imposing to someone who really needs some support or someone who is just dropping in. I don't personally have any criticism of anyone at this board or their posts that includes you. Although I haven't cured you of that little conservative twitch that you have developed.;)

I would agree that a hot topics or light chat board would be the ideal solution but it doesn't sound like Scott has the time. With that in mind I think we should all attempt to move forward for the sake of the board. If D Thomas is serious about setting up a linked site for hot topics I think that would be a great solution.

best wishes marie

Re: That's fine with me ScottR

Ed Davis, DPM on 9/27/03 at 18:52 (131322)

marie:

Thank you for your kind words. I think that there is plenty of room for every need on this board. If someone has a question there all always those who try to answer it either professionally or personally. Other than issues of 'space' there is no reason one should believe that the presence of an issue presented by another poster crowds out that person's needs or concerns. A political post never crowds out of takes the place of a medical post, nor a personal post. Although, when drawn into arguments like today, I have wasted time that probably could have been better spent on the other boards. There are a lot of improvements that could be considered to the site.

Again, I am puzzled as to why some feel that they need to go on the attack against other posters and cannot discuss issues on a rational basis. Many, if not all of us, are 'total packages' in the sense that the same thing that motivates me to answer medical questions motivates me politically. I have just gone through a barrage of insults, have been told to shut up and go elsewhere. It has happened before. One of the dissapointments this time was some of the sources of the invectives -- people who I thought respected me and whom I had respected until now.
Perhaps some have just shown their 'true colors.'

The clinicians here enjoy answering questions on the boards and we will probably continue to do so, but will do so as 'total packages.'
Ed

Re: That's fine with me ScottR

Sharon W on 9/27/03 at 19:14 (131329)

:(

Although my orientation is also to the left of yours, Dr. Ed, I have found many things of interest in what you've had to say about these (now) forbidden topics, and I've appreciated reading your insights.

Of course, your participation on the other boards is crucial to desperate posters with foot pain; I think few of us would dispute that. But I have appreciated your participation here on the Social board, too. I feel that I have gotten to know you a little bit here -- and yes, you do get a bit emotional sometimes! -- but so do I -- and overall you have revealed yourself to be very much a person worth knowing.

So, Dr. Ed, I hope that even though Scott has forbidden politics here you will still continue to post on the Social board, at least occasionally...

Sharon
:-s

Re: That's fine with me ScottR

marie on 9/27/03 at 19:25 (131331)

Ed,

I can't control everything and everyone in the world. But I can control my reaction to it. Instead of dwelling on criticism lets move forward and pursue another outlet for political discussions. Don't you think D Thomas' idea is of some value? It's really ok. When it comes together I will be there to challenge you and the others and have some fun. Until then I have some questions for you.

1. Where did you go to medical School? I've always wondered that.

2. Why did you decide to become a podiatrist? In case you didn't know I have followed all your advice and with the help and support I got here I am doing much better. My doctors really did'nt know what to do with me.

best wishes marie

Re: That's fine with me ScottR

Ed Davis, DPM on 9/27/03 at 19:29 (131334)

Sharon:
I appreciate your comments. It is possible, as Dr. Z stated below, that political topics will be allowed again. I wonder what Scott is going to do with posts from new posters who don't know the rules yet.

I have friends of various political persuasions and don't have to be in agreement with someone politically to be friends and be able to have productive discussions. I think that some of my friends who are liberals would be very dissapointed with what some are doing here, keeping in mind that conservatives don't have a monopoly on the desire to preserve free speech. The ACLU is one of the largest promoters of free speech.

I will be back for better or worse to the social board. Obviously, there are some individuals who I will do my best to avoid discussing anything with -- individuals whom , I feel have shown a dark side which I did not know existed. Best wishes. :)
Ed

Re: That's fine with me ScottR

Ed Davis, DPM on 9/27/03 at 19:38 (131335)

marie:

I have not had a chance to check my email yet so I will catch up on that and keep you informed. I went to Rutgers College for undergrad followed by the Pennsylvania College of Podiatric Medicine (now the Temple University School of Podiatric Medicine) in Philly. I had some foot problems in high school and after seeing several docs who could not help, saw a podiatrist who did. I became convinced that the podiatry profession was a badly needed profession that not enough people knew about so that the potential for growth was large.

To this day, podiatry is somewhat underutilized. If you look at a lot of the posts on this site, it can take people a long time, sometimes too long to get helped professionally. The want to help people, volunteerism, the belief in individual repsonsibility and action are what attracts me to the site -- the same things that shape may political philosophies. It is not a coincidence that there are political similarities between all the clinicians posting on this site.
Ed

Re: That's fine with me ScottR

HAHA on 9/27/03 at 19:39 (131336)

He didn't go to Medical School he went to podiatric school!!!! That's because he didn't have what it takes to be an MD, case closed!

Re: That's fine with me ScottR

Sharon W on 9/27/03 at 19:47 (131339)

ScottR,

I wanted to call your attention to this one because there is no excuse for it whatsoever -- nothing more clearly violates the 'be nice' rule -- and the poster obviously realized that him/herself because they chose to post anonymously:

Reply to Message # 131337

Re: That's fine with me ScottR view thread
Posted by HAHA on 9/27/03 at 19:39

He didn't go to Medical School he went to podiatric school!!!! That's because he didn't have what it takes to be an MD, case closed!
Posted to Category: Social / Support

Sharon
.

Re: That's fine with me ScottR

Sharon W on 9/27/03 at 19:57 (131341)

To whoever wrote this:

Did you think that podiatrists were MDs?

You have just shown how much you know...

Sharon
.

Re: That's fine with me ScottR

JudyS on 9/27/03 at 21:59 (131356)

Marie - At the risk of sounding lofty, I just wanted to say that your statements here are very insightful and I sure appreciate your willingness to, IMHO, perhaps see a bigger picture that might be the welfare of this message board - I know how you love a good political discussion! And your ideas for other places for political discussion may be a perfect compromise.

Re: That's fine with me ScottR

JudyS on 9/27/03 at 22:08 (131357)

Sharon, I just saw that post. It's been deleted.

Re: That's fine with me ScottR

BGCPed on 9/27/03 at 22:23 (131360)

Scott should trace the ip of HAHA and ban them. I am 100%sure it is not a first time poster. It is a gutless A-HOLE that doesnt have the courage to use their real name. If I was Dr Ed I would bail on this site. He gives lots of advice and posts thought provoking ideas. The fact that some hand-wringers dont have the brains to avoide a post that THEY KNOW WILL BOTHER THEM.

Dr Ed has contributed more to this board in one day than many have in 6 months. I dont know many places where people can get free, sound medical advice every day. People dont have a problem reading his medical advice but some think because he is a Dr he cant have a strong opinion. He is a person that happens to be a Dr. He can care for people, which he does and still have a strong conservative belief system.

I have never met him but based on his postings regarding med advice, he is a very caring and sound practitioner. Some folks on here should be ashamed of themselves but they arent. Thats one of the qualities of some on the left they want freedom of ideas and acceptance but not when it comes from a person that doesnt share their views.

Peter R says a few things over the top but I think much is to get a rise out of some people. He is a smart guy and I value some of his posts. He spices up the board and when he posts a comment I dont agree with I dont want him banned. Marie is left of me and we exchange posts. I would have a beer with her. I know I wont convert her but I dont hate her or want her banned.

Think about it if Dr Ed leaves and Dr Z and or Wander go on vacation you may as well get rid of the ask the Dr, eswt and the surgery boards.

Re: That's fine with me ScottR,

Ed Davis, DPM on 9/27/03 at 22:36 (131363)

BG:
Thanks. I did not even bother to respond to that individual. But I really have to wonder why nobody is deleting his post.

So if I go ahead and post something political, it will be deleted but it is okay for hecklers to do anonymous hit and run attacks. I guess it depends on who they attack :-/
Ed

Re: correction

Ed Davis, DPM on 9/27/03 at 22:45 (131367)

Sorry,
I did not realize that the words of the post were deleted but the title was still standing. Please accept my apologies.

Judy-- I take it you were the deleter and thank you for that.
I share John's bias for free speech but he does not like to delete things. There are limits to free speech and those limits include avoiding deliberate provocation of a fight. Ideas themselves can be controversial and lead to fights but a line needs to be drawn between the presentation of ideas controversial or not and wanton insults designed to provoke animosity.
Ed

Re: That's fine with me ScottR,

JudyS on 9/27/03 at 22:47 (131368)

Catch up with me Dr. Ed - I DID delete that post....

Re: correction

JudyS on 9/27/03 at 22:59 (131371)

There you go again Dr. Ed - making a ton of sense. (IMHO).

How would you draw that line in the sand? If, say, a post like Peter's deflated what was otherwise a respectable political discussion, what would you, as a participant, do or say? After all, you're working hard at keeping the discussion on an intellectual level. Did that kind of post wreck the whole thing for you because I reacted to it? You, Marie, BCG, et. al. didn't seem to be over the top, so to speak. Would you want to regulate Peter's kind of post yourself in order that the discussion you're taking so much care with not go down in flames?
Seems like a good idea to me. Perhaps the rest of us would be far more understanding if those of you who enjoy those spirited discussions would also be willing to regulate them.
Well, it's late. I played ball all day. I prattle on. My brain is mush. So what's new, huh? :)

Re: correction

Ed Davis, DPM on 9/27/03 at 23:39 (131378)

Hi Judy -- what's new with you?
Its Saturday night and I am still at the office doing paperwork. Catch me posting on a saturday and I am going to be cantanerous as I don't like paperwork.

I can't see having different 'editors' for posters. I really don't think that your reaction to Peter's post was an issue. Peter likes to fan the flames but he does not usually engage in personal attack or character assasination. If there was a liberal equivalent of Peter on this site, I would not be disturbed. Some like to make strong statements to spice things up and get things going. Again, I am getting tired of listening to myself on this; there is a big difference between expressing views on issues no matter how strong those views are and taking personal shots at other posters. No one has to read or respond to another's viewpoint. People are generally compelled to respond when they have been personally attacked. Why cannot some here distinguish between ideas and individuals?!?!?!?!? I don't care if someone wants to come on here and discuss anarchism - - that person can say what they want about the concept and I would like to discuss the concept but have no reason to attack him as an individual. Those who don't care about anarchism can simply not click on the post instead of launching a diatribe about how terrible the anarchist is and how is is destroying the board.

Hope all is well with you and in the immortal words of the next governor of California.... 'hasta la vista, baby' and 'I'll be back.' ;) ;) ;) ;)
Ed

Re: That's fine with me ScottR -- to bg and others who have a "problem" with the wishes of most people here

nancy s. on 9/27/03 at 23:42 (131379)

'Thats one of the qualities of some on the left they want freedom of ideas and acceptance but not when it comes from a person that doesnt share their views.'

bg, clearly this could be said of many not only on the left, but on the right, and in the middle. most of the lovers of political discussion on this board come from the right. but not all from the right on this board want to be bogged down daily in political discussion. i log on here tonight to find the right-leaning folks now attacking their own, attacking the owner of this website, and who will be next? you can say anything to me or about me that you want, but i left eight months ago and i'm not back to stay. so swing away.

the foot-pain sufferers who have remained here, despite the endless unpleasantness they're supposed to wade through but ignore, are real people with real pain who have a real need for a calm place to go for education and support. why this is so difficult to understand i'll never know, but i accept the fact -- i have to -- that a few people simply don't or won't get it. the people in pain with the need for the supportive place are not the selfish ones. those who don't have this need but are driven to pontificate or debate or, in the case of a couple of people, spew hatred, in my opinion are demonstrating extreme selfishness tonight. they can go to a million different places, on the internet and in real life, to debate politics and stir up controversy to their heart's content. people with foot pain have very few places to go to educate and support themselves and each other when it comes to dealing with the havoc it wreaks on one's life.

it is not censorship for people with a problem in common to strive to create a healing place and atmosphere. this doesn't mean that humor, irony, satire, intelligence, and so on go out the window (they were in abundance here for much of my 3+ years here); but outright attempts to upset people and knowingly bring up what every citizen of the world knows are very controversial topics that people can never agree on are disrespectful and insensitive to those who still very much need what hs.com offered for most of its life.

ed davis has offered plenty of sound health-for-feet advice. but he's not irreplaceable; no one is. the ask-the-doctors board would not fold if he chose to leave. and isn't it obvious, especially from the posts by several of his fellow conservatives tonight, that the social board would actually thrive if he and you and a few others ceased their endless tirades against groups and individuals they think are politically (or socially, i guess) stupid or distasteful?

i have no stake here now. Hs.com and the regulars here during the worst of my foot trouble (and it was BAD) rescued me in ways too numerous to list, and i'll be grateful for the rest of my life; i can't express how grateful i am. i'm at 75% improvement and very happy with it compared to what i endured for almost three years. i'm writing now only because i wish the same for people who've been regulars here for quite a while and not only need the support of others but also provide a lot of support to newcomers -- they give just as generously as the professionals on this board. and speaking of newcomers, this year if i were a french, german, other-european, muslim, female, democrat, and/or liberal (is the list endless?) newcomer, i'd take one look at the social/'support' board and run like hell. this is 'freedom'? i doubt very much that scottr wants this board limited to the comfort of far-right white american males.

call it 'p.c.' if you want, but that's a very short and convenient view. or call it censorship if you want, which -- i agree with judy -- is ridiculous.

let me try to bring it to your world, and i don't pretend to understand your world. but suppose the pedorthist profession were in a mess, and it's really mucking up your whole life, personal as well as professional, and you help form a group trying to endure the muck and find solutions to the problems. would you welcome a bunch of non-pedorthist folks throwing open the doors during your meetings, rushing in and mouthing off about, say, the virtues of climbing the corporate ladder? would you welcome them bursting in on every meeting and dominating your discussion with a topic that has little to no relevance to the major problem you're trying to figure out in your life? sure, you might find it amusing every few meetings for a minute or two, but overall would you not feel that your RIGHT to meet in an atmosphere that's solution-seeking for the problem at hand is being interrupted, invaded, maybe even stolen?

as wendy pointed out, you have a million, billion, whatever websites you can go to to tout your political views and spew whatever you want that has nothing to do with people trying to fix their lives due to bad feet and chronic pain. you have countless opportunities and options: what is this whining and complaining because it isn't welcomed by everyone here?? as professonals dedicated to helping people deal with foot pain, you amaze me in that you can't see the damage you're inflicting with the political diatribes on a social/support board. the people here with a need not to endure political diatribes are not selfish; it is selfish to think you should inflict them anywhere you please and on anyone you please. several of the people who thanked scott for his 'edict' are partially or mostly in agreement with you politically; can you not respect their wishes for this board? you attack your own simply because you've lost one of millions of possible platforms for your political views? i can't understand it.

clearly a few of you get a kick out of it, and that's fine. but to badmouth people who were here before you and want this place generally to be apolitical -- and to badmouth ScottR, the webmaster, of all people, who created it in the first place and has every right to institute rules -- is really poor form.

for your own dignity at the very least, i'd accept graciously an antidote to what looks to me to be an abuse of freedom that's gone on far too long. the people here who are suffering deserve far more than what you've dished out for the past several months, not to mention tonight.

nancy
.

Re: That's fine with me ScottR -- to bg and others who have a "problem" with the wishes of most people here

Dorothy on 9/28/03 at 00:09 (131380)

Nancy S. ~

I think you make some very good points here. I am going to speculate on one thing - it is possible that the people who post here, whether it is the person whose feet and life are in turmoil or whether it is the podiatrist with strong political opinions, do so for similar reasons: they think they are among friends, albeit 'virtual' friends, for the most part. They may feel accepted, welcome, appreciated for one reason or another. We have often read of people whose foot problems are wreaking havoc in their lives say that their family members don't want to hear their 'complaining', but they can 'complain' here because almost everyone here knows about foot pain. (By the way, I thought that Dr. Ed DID have foot pain, as well as treat it....no?)

I don't know the answer to this dilemma, and maybe the one proposed by others here is the best one, but it seems there may be other possibilities. I hope that compromises can be found that will satisfy everyone (or almost everyone.)

I do happen to believe that most people can both work on fixing their foot problems AND consider other ideas simultaneously, including political ones. But your points are well taken and give us all something to think about.

Re: That's fine with me ScottR -- to bg and others who have a "problem" with the wishes of most people here

Ed Davis, DPM on 9/28/03 at 00:09 (131381)

nancy:

No one here is forced to click on a link or post with a political discussion. There are lots of things I don't click on, on this site and other sites -- everyone has a choice so no has to 'endure' political diatribes or anything they don't want to read.

Most importantly you seem to be confused between the perpetrator and perpetratee. Read my last post to Judy -- I will repeat for the seemingly zillionth time that one must distinguish between ideas and individuals.
Anyone should be able to bring a set of ideas and/or concepts here political or otherwise without having to undergo personal attack. Many of us who start political discussions here by bringing articles or items of interest to the board, again -- no one is forced to click on them. Those ariticle contain ideas to learn from and for potential discussion, IF one takes the choice of participation -- they are not fodder to formulate personal attacks against the person who introduced the idea. It is those personal attacks that inflame emotions and start arguments. Everyone has the OPTION to engage in intelligent discussion about the issues and ideas or not. Again, the discussion is intended to be about the issues, not the personalities or individuals introducing the issues.

Give me an example of any of us whom you so accuse of badmouthing someone here before us. Just one. I don't think you can unless it is an example of one of us being forced to defend ourselves against personal attack-- something that happened again today in this discussion.

Anyone has had the right to say ... 'Hey guys, lets give political discussion a break for a few days, please (remember that magic word)'
How many times has that occurred???????? I think that most would be happy to have complied including myself. Instead, without any discussion, some go directly to Scott to complain and an edict is handed down. Our concerns about the edict are met with personal attacks which are available for all to read. If that is what you call a nurturing environment for heel pain sufferers, you really have got me in a state of disbelief.
Ed

Re: That's fine with me ScottR -- to bg and others who have a "problem" with the wishes of most people here

nancy s. on 9/28/03 at 00:23 (131383)

ed: you'll just have to accept my word on this: i am not confused as to perpetrators and perpetrees. read every one of your 'social/support' posts since, say, last february. you, as well as others on both sides, are no saint when it comes to personal attack or ability to discuss political ideas rationally, i.e., without emotion. you complain of others' inability to do so, implying that you are always able to do so, but, like others, you are not. you are a human being.

nancy
.

Re: That's fine with me ScottR -- to bg and others who have a "problem" with the wishes of most people here

nancy s. on 9/28/03 at 00:37 (131385)

thanks, dorothy. i do think you're right in that both foot-pain sufferers and foot professionals on this board tend to assume they're among friends, albeit virtual friends. from what i've read tonight (quite far back), it appears to me that the professionals, mostly speaking to and agreeing with each other, do really believe they are among friends -- and indeed they are, in some ways. on the other hand, a good number of foot-pain sufferers seem to have lost the feeling that they're among friends; they seem nervous, and i can't blame them. for even if they agree with the avidly political folks' views, they are swished away verbally when they express their concern about the tone and safety of the board.

nancy
.

Re: That's fine with me ScottR -- to bg and others who have a "problem" with the wishes of most people here

Ed Davis, DPM on 9/28/03 at 00:37 (131386)

Nancy:

Of course, I have no claims to sainthood. But I have had the displeasure, as have others, of coming under attack repeatedly simply for introducing an article or set of ideas. We all have emotion but have to be willing to discuss ideas, political or otherwise with a reasonable degree of emotional detachment. I have an open door to those who want to present ideas here -- I am not the one asking for Scott to censor politics. What next should some ask Scott to censor? Some tried to browbeat Scott, just a few months ago, to censor information on low energy ESWT. One poster implied that the authorities would 'knock on my door' if I did not stop talking about that.

When you start picking and chosing the freedoms that others should have, you embark on a problematic path.
Ed

Re: That's fine with me ScottR -- to bg and others who have a "problem" with the wishes of most people here

nancy s. on 9/28/03 at 01:04 (131389)

ed: we have something in common. i too have had the displeasure of coming under attack here for my political views. from my reading, your introductions of articles or sets of ideas have not always been free of aggressiveness or of emotional attachment to them -- sometimes yes, but certainly not always. i'm quite sure you'd agree that they are not always, as would any reasonable person.

as for freedom and censorship, you might want to re-read what i posted to bg a short time ago. these things are addressed in my post, and i stand by them. i hold freedom very dear: on this message board, i'm concerned about the freedom of ALL posters who have stayed this year, especially that of people who suffer chronic pain and who i believe have a right to try to create and maintain a healing atmosphere on a website dedicated to a health problem that can make life hell.

i still wonder why you feel you must thrust your political views -- no matter what they are -- on this particular forum, when in general this kind of thing creates hard feelings and shuts some people out. (maybe some think it shouldn't have that effect, but surely you've noticed that, ultimately, it does, or at least it has here? judy expressed this very well.) you and those interested can email to your heart's content on these topics, and/or you can participate in countless political forums. why is it, do you think, that its not being welcomed anymore by the regular people here and the webmaster is so clearly upsetting to you? i thought d. thomas made a generous offer and suggest you seriously follow up on it. i imagine it would provide everything you took advantage of here. i mean, it would be a forum, and probably one with people who are more interested than those here seem to be. why not follow that path instead of trying to twist the people here into a pretzel they don't want to be? that's my sincere suggestion, and now to bed.

nancy
.

Re: That's fine with me ScottR -- to bg and others who have a "problem" with the wishes of most people here

Ed Davis, DPM on 9/28/03 at 01:23 (131392)

nancy:
Why do state that I 'thrust' my political views ...? I state my views and they are 'thrust' on no one. I will follow D. Thomas' offer as it pertains to his study. Who are the 'regular people' you speak of who don't want to here open discussion of the issues? Am I not a 'regular?'
Is John H. not a 'regular?' Is BG not a 'regular?' Is Dr. Z not a 'regular.' How about Peter? Do you dislike hm enough to deny him status as a 'regular?' Perhaps you would like the liberty to define 'regulars' as only those individuals who agree with you.

Are you stating that I can 'email to my hearts content' all those whom you will not bequeath the honor of being 'regulars' but I better get off this board?
Ed

Re: That's fine with me ScottR -- to bg and others who have a "problem" with the wishes of most people here

BGCPed on 9/28/03 at 01:34 (131394)

Dr Ed, good luck, I think you would have better luck trying to nail jello to a tree

Re: That's fine with me ScottR -- to bg and others who have a "problem" with the wishes of most people here

nancy s. on 9/28/03 at 02:00 (131396)

no, ed. i don't believe i stated any of the things you question me about.

all of the people you mentioned are regulars. so are many people not heard much from lately.

i really don't mean offense by this, but i do sense that your political views, repeated over and over and in lengthy posts (some copied), are somewhat 'thrust' upon others here. you are probably just excited about them and don't see your presentation as 'thrusting.' and if i'm all wet, so be it and it can end here. (people who want to continue the diatribes keep asking why others don't simply skip over them -- but, as you probably know, most regular posters don't pick and choose from the index: they read the 'messages since last visit' or whatever instruction, and believe me, when you do that there is a lot of scrolling time and wasted space due to excessive political posting.)

it is only from the several posts by other regulars tonight (and mostly conservatives) that i perceived they feel thrust upon. my own words. but it's a perception that's fairly strong. all it took was simply to read the posts of long-term foot-pain sufferers who have been here and contributed for a good while but have become rather quiet, and then chose to speak up and thank scott tonight for a new guideline. i'm listening to them, and humbly suggesting that you consider doing the same. it's that simple.

nancy
.

Re: That's fine with me ScottR -- to bg and others who have a "problem" with the wishes of most people here

Carole C in NOLA on 9/28/03 at 08:03 (131405)

Nancy, thanks for speaking up. And welcome back! We missed you. I too may post more often about foot problems and social/support topics once again, if the situation ever improves.

A kind and supportive board is SO easy to destroy, but so hard to build or rebuild. Maybe we were just lucky that we knew this board before it became such a mess.

Carole C

Re: That's fine with me ScottR

marie on 9/28/03 at 08:11 (131407)

Thanks for responding. So how did you end up in Seattle?

marie

Re: That's fine with me ScottR

BrianG on 9/28/03 at 09:18 (131421)

Judy, as long as your deleting, you may as well delete the 2nd half of Sharon's post.

Regards,
BrianG

Re: That's fine with me ScottR -- to bg and others who have a "problem" with the wishes of most people here

nancy s. on 9/28/03 at 09:34 (131423)

hi back, carole. yes, we were very lucky to have this board. i arrived here in 1999, like wendy, when there was just one message board. we had a lot of fun along with the support and the figuring out of what to do about feet. dr. z. was the only regularly posting doc in those days, but over time he brought others onboard. we'd sometimes get to feeling a bit guilty about excessive fooling around, so it was a great gift when scott established the social/support board. the place was a treasure: often funny, compassionate, a big mix. there were the occasional dust-ups, naturally, since we're all human, but the general variety was great. may it flourish with variety once again! when did you find hs.com and start posting? must have been a long time ago because i can't remember (or maybe i was knocked out on meds at the time, heh heh).

nancy
.

Re: That's fine with me ScottR -- to bg and others who have a "problem" with the wishes of most people here

marie on 9/28/03 at 10:12 (131432)

nancy s,

Nice to hear that you're back. Please stick around. I have missed you and the others so very much.

best wishes marie

Re: That's fine with me ScottR -- to bg and others who have a "problem" with the wishes of most people here

JudyS on 9/28/03 at 10:33 (131436)

Yes I know, Dr. Ed, that I've become repetative so this is my last hurrah on this. These words:

'When you start picking and chosing the freedoms that others should have, you embark on a problematic path.'

....are just a shade inaccurate as they apply to this website.

No one has expressed a desire to limit others' freedoms - far from it. We've just asked that political conversations, with their inherent potential for problems, be taken to a more appropriate forum. Which, according to Wendyn, there must be six-zillion or so of readily available with no regulation whatsoever. Tons of freedom.

Re: That's fine with me ScottR -- to bg and others who have a "problem" with the wishes of most people here

JudyS on 9/28/03 at 10:37 (131437)

Nancy S - as always it's pure joy to see your name and to read your well-thought-out words. I admire the thoroughness in your thoughts.

Re: That's fine with me ScottR

JudyS on 9/28/03 at 11:07 (131452)

Brian, I am not sure which of Sharon's posts you refer to as I see nothing that warrents deletion.

Perhaps it's time for us to stop making statements about one another's posts? I don't know about John or Wendy, but I'll certainly do my best to oversee the posts like those of 'Julius'. But the rest of us are 'regulars' and we are friends so let's ease up on eachother. It'll only fan the flames and, as you know, Scott has no qualms about shutting down the board.

Re: That's fine with me ScottR

Sharon W on 9/28/03 at 11:11 (131454)

Judy,

Brian means the one immediately below HA HA's offensive post, where I QUOTED the offensive post -- I don't have the ability to delete that one now, or I already would have -- so please do... I am making the same request!

In the future I won't do them that way, it is something Scott had said once to do but I can see the downside to it!

Sharon
.

Re: That's fine with me ScottR -- to bg and others who have a "problem" with the wishes of most people here

Ed Davis, DPM on 9/28/03 at 11:26 (131455)

Judy:

Some here have not 'asked' that political conversations be taken elsewhere. That would not have been so bad. It was MANDATED that that be the case.
Ed

Re: That's fine with me ScottR -- to bg and others who have a "problem" with the wishes of most people here

Carole C in NOLA on 9/28/03 at 11:56 (131464)

I know what you mean. I arrived after you and when I arrived the board was probably the best message board I'd ever seen... you, Nancy N, Julie, Suzanne, John H, Judy S, Donna SL, and Barb were all posting. It's hard for me to think of those who began to post so voluminously during the past year or so as 'regulars' because the tone is so different. Nancy, I think you were the one that persuaded me to buy my first pair of Birkenstocks when I first showed up. Did I ever thank you? Thanks! :)

Carole C

Re: me too!

Carole C in NOLA on 9/28/03 at 11:58 (131466)

Yes, me too! I too think it's great to see you back again, Nancy S. :)

Carole

Re: That's fine with me ScottR -- to bg and others who have a "problem" with the wishes of most people here

Ed Davis, DPM on 9/28/03 at 12:05 (131470)

Carole:
And Bonnie is looking for a new board to go to. Do you feel better now that you and your gang have the board all to yourselves with no one to disagree with you?
Ed

Re: me too!

Ed Davis, DPM on 9/28/03 at 12:07 (131472)

And do you feel equally as good to see Bonnie leaving?
Ed

Re: That's fine with me ScottR -- to bg and others who have a "problem" with the wishes of most people here

marie on 9/28/03 at 12:39 (131488)

Ed

I didn't see that Bonnie was leaving just asking where a good conservative site was. You're above this kind of behavior so please settle down. I think if this kind of conversation continues Scott will shut down the social board. Do you want that to happen? Patients really need this site. I need it because I am not well and need to escape my health issues.I realize that you are hurting and I feel bad about that but it's time to let go. Have you heard from D Thomas? There is an alternative so lets take it.

I'm not making excuses for anyone's behavior so lets just please give this a go.

respectfully marie

Re: That's fine with me ScottR -- to bg and others who have a "problem" with the wishes of most people here

Ed Davis, DPM on 9/28/03 at 14:37 (131546)

marie:
I think Phil addressed this later but I interpreted Bonnie as asking for a new place to go. She has not posted in the last few days and feel that she did not like what she saw here. I cannot blame her. It is a shame that new posters cannot find a hiome here if some don't like their ideas. I guess we will see if she comes back -- I have asked her to.
Ed

Re: That's fine with me ScottR -- to bg and others who have a "problem" with the wishes of most people here

nancy s. on 9/28/03 at 17:20 (131567)

hey, marie: great to see you, too! actually, i've seen more of you than you have of me, but a lot of days that makes you lucky. i will be checking in sometimes.

nancy
.

Re: That's fine with me ScottR -- to bg and others who have a "problem" with the wishes of most people here

nancy s. on 9/28/03 at 17:29 (131570)

thanks, judy. your posts today are knocking my socks off with their wisdom -- and to think you tend to be a conservative! how rash of me! i couldn't care less.

yes, the sleep thing is an ongoing obstacle to real life, but i manage. the up side is that i suspect the way i'll ultimately die is to one day, long from now, simply collapse into a sleep-deprived coma and not wake up. it wouldn't be a bad way to go!

nancy
.

Re: That's fine with me ScottR -- to bg and others who have a "problem" with the wishes of most people here

nancy s. on 9/28/03 at 17:34 (131573)

carole, if i persuaded you to try birks, then i hope i rested on that laurel for at least a week. to this day, birks make life possible for me; i don't know what i'd do without 'em. that's great if they help you too. you're most welcome!

nancy
.

Re: That's fine with me ScottR -- to bg and others who have a "problem" with the wishes of most people here

Carole C in NOLA on 9/28/03 at 19:03 (131582)

Nancy, I don't know how I ever managed to live B.B. (Before Birkenstocks). I LIVE in them. I've spent all my 'at home' time in them, and this summer I've even worn them to work every day. They make life possible for me too, and if it hadn't been for your powers of persuasion, I'd still be standing in a shoe store thinking that nothing THAT hard could ever be bearable on my poor, sore feet. Thank you.