With respect to the discussion on the work on Firstnet by Prof Patrick I am seeing much to much of the playing the man and not the ball.
From now on - only people who are prepared to use their names publishing on this topic or contributing properly to the debate - the call at my discretion will be published. The blog is NOT going to become personal abuse central!
There has become just too much evidence lacking assertion from many commenters in my view.
David.
This blog is totally independent, unpaid and has only three major objectives.
The first is to inform readers of news and happenings in the e-Health domain, both here in Australia and world-wide.
The second is to provide commentary on e-Health in Australia and to foster improvement where I can.
The third is to encourage discussion of the matters raised in the blog so hopefully readers can get a balanced view of what is really happening and what successes are being achieved.
Quote Of The Year
Timeless Quotes - Sadly The Late Paul Shetler - "Its not Your Health Record it's a Government Record Of Your Health Information"
or
H. L. Mencken - "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
Tuesday, March 08, 2011
Anonymous Comments On Prof Patrick Blogs
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I receive a lot of this nonsense at the HC Renewal blog as well. While I post most of the comments, sometimes I amplify them when they are particularly pathologic, as in the case of the aforementioned HIT Vendor Sockpuppet.
Mental and emotional pathology in a field such as healthcare IT has no place. People suffering those maladies might consider sparing patients from their pathologies by finding other sources of employment.
Although doing so would require clear and altruistic thinking...
-- SS
Scot - I find it quite ironic that rather than attempting to debate the issues raised by some of the anonymous posters, you instead choose to rail against the folks making the comments.
In Australia we call this playing the man and not the ball.
Jon's paper certainly raises some important issues, but it is hardly above reproach. It's unfortunate that the anonymous posters made their points in a clumsy fashion (but no worse than your own), because there is merit in much of what they have presented.
Am I the only one who finds this ironic? The Patrick paper is esentially 190 pages of anonymous comment and unverified opinion.
Of course it may all be perfectly valid opinion - but no-one should be surprised if those who have a different view take exception
Hang on!
He put his name to the research and views. How is that anonymous?
One has to accept the ED Directors were not verbaled into saying what they did not mean. In the press that seems to have been confirmed.
David
LOL the only name he put to anything was the poor patients' name he left in his screenshots!!
"LOL the only name he put to anything was the poor patients' name he left in his screenshots!!"
Try the title page!
David.
Post a Comment