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

eds post moved from Dr's board because i deleted the other thread

Posted by Ed Davis on 11/28/03 at 12:46 (138873)

Dorothy and Scott:

I believe that it is important to set the record straight on this issue for fairness to all readers. First of all, Scott, you are welcome to post on the new board. That is true for all who post on this board. I realize that you may not want to as you view it as a 'competing' service.

I believe that, about a little over a month ago, 2 groups of posters came to an impasse so a break was necessary. Scott, in my view, was clearly on the side of the opposing group. It was thus better for everyone, including Scott that the two groups go their separate ways. Without this action, there would have been ongoing squabbling without an end in sight.
I am convinced, that there exist some, who have a perverse pyschological need to maintain a state of animosity -- I don't feel that Scott is one of those but feel that there may have been one or two individuals with that need influencing Scott's thinking on the matter.

The other board, and site that will be connected to it operates under a different set of rules. Those are rules that many of us feel compfortable with-- perhaps not one's that others would. At least there is a choice.

ScottR, your comments about the outsourcing issue are very well taken and I think are very valid. There is a trade off we had to make. Such trade offs present exactly the problems ScottR has mentioned. What we get back, as a 'plus' in the trade is that the board requires registrations, and as such, limits 'hit and run' posts and problems with 'trolls,' spammers and others who may be considered disruptive to the board.
We are largely dependend on the 'skills' of the people who things have been outsourced to, to control such potential problems. I am a aware of a definite hacker who had changed 'fonts' on Scott's book but that was quite a while ago. On the other hand, the so-called more recent 'trolls' are getting fewer here and may represent some remnants of the many who were either 'blocked (formally)' , purged, run off, offended into leaving or whatever. Many who left were prodded and goaded so don't be surprised if some decided to take an occasional parting jab. If anything, giving those individuals a new place to go should only make them lose interest faster in this site. Unfortunately, without knowing how to reach some of them and their true names, I don't know any way other to reach them other than to assume they may still come by to read this site and find the new site via a post -- so not allowing a link has both advantages and disadvantages to Scott. Some early attempts at forming a link were blocked.

You may note that the manner in which the boards are divided are different. We have a 'coffee house' for 'chit chat' and support but we also have a board for 'hot topics.' That 'division' solves a longstanding issue that existed on the social board here. I thought that a reasonable compromise was provided by ScottR but some would not tolerate the compromise. Now, that is where many of us took issues with Scott. Scott, we felt, was gracious in providing the compromise, but when some seemed determined to make the compromise not work, Scott took their side instead of defending the compromise.

Scott, you built your site based a combination of personal experiences, 'blood and sweat,' and collective information garnered from hundreds of posters and thousands of readers. You don't display a 'hit counter' and am still not sure why. The thing I have oft emphasized to you is that you have far more readers than posters which such a counter demonstrates and it is important to satisfy the readers, not just the posters. I can testify to that as I was an occasional reader almost two years before I made my first post. Readers must feel that they are in a friendly environment, and I am sorry to say, Scott, you have too often made decisions based on the wants and advice of a small band of hard core posters who, I assume, you get more than enough email from. I was most pleasantly surprised to see you stand up for the integrity of your site and a particular poster (King).

As for the near future, going separate ways, is the only thing I can see.
ScottR, if you have a change of heart, let us know and we can discuss things -- perhaps merging the new board/site back into yours, simply giving you a bigger and better site. Believe me, I have very little time and desire to construct and run a website and have my hands full with other things. I do so for those that have been disenfranchised from this site, readers, posters and professionals such as myself and BGCPed.

Re: eds post moved from Dr's board

Ed Davis on 11/28/03 at 12:54 (138874)

if you've had adisagreement with Dr Ed, please don't respond to his post....i care not to see another long argument ensue

i'll link to any website that wants to discuss politics but not heel pain.

i'm on the side of whoever is nice and keeps the topic here at heelpsurs.com about heel pain

I believe their were 2 or 3 posts made linking to the message board that i let though so that those who wanted could switch. i so no one on ed's side who did not make the switch

Re: eds post moved from Dr's board

Ed Davis, DPM on 11/28/03 at 13:23 (138876)


I appreciate letting this post stand. Anyone who wants to reach me personally can do so at (email removed) as we need to keep discussion pertaining to this issue off Scott's site and such issues are not even appropriate for the new site. You are welcome to dicuss these issue with me a personal basis.

I would like to remind ScottR of his link to the site on tarsal tunnel syndrome so I am not sure it is to his detriment to link to the 'new' site. Keep in mind that, I am very willing, when the circumstances are right, consider turning the new site back to Scott. It is not just my decision to make because I am not the 'owner' of that and because we simply need 'time' to let things continue to settle down and eventually, I hope, engage in constructive dialogue.

Re: oops, two posts with Ed's name are by Scott

scott r on 11/28/03 at 13:27 (138877)

i didn't change back to my name after i moved his post