Podiatry Arena members do not see these ads

It was suggested in another thread that if I stated an opinion that it should be backed with proof or evidence and if I did not supply it that I should go do some research to prove it.

What do people think about the burden of proof for discussion on these forums?

Should what we say be able to pass for publication in a peer reviewed journal?

Is the evidence required for statements different for different people? For example should those with a vested commercial interest (eg Orthotic Labs) be held more accountable? Should academics be required to be able to prove what they say - seeing they have easier access to periodicals?

My personal view is that if every opinion we state requires a cohort study then there will not be much discussion going on. At the same time unsubstantiated statements should be refuted. If something is prefaced as an opinion it should be able to stand as an opinion. If it is stated as a fact then it requires factual evidence.

I think this is an important issue for the very workings of this website.

What say you?

__________________
********************************
Steve Manning
Director - Runner - Podiatrist
Intraining Running Centre
Intraining Running Injury Clinic
33 Park Road Milton Qld 4064 AUSTRALIA
07. 3367 3088
www.intraining.com.au
footman@intraining.com.au

Steve

I think we may all have been jaded by some of the statements placed on this forum and then the 'aggressive' reactions to them.
It seems to have got to the stage where opinions are shot down before any discussion can begin.
In some cases this is spot on as the forum does lend some type of credibility to those who post on it - new or inexperienced posters may believe some of the crap posted - and it can be difficult to sift the wheat from the chaff.

However I would like to see a bit more acceptance of opinions and less reactionary replies.

Phil

Steve,

I agree. Basically all of the biomechanical discussion around theory is just that. Especially the discussions on waht orthoses actually do and how do they do it. There are NO definative studies which tell us exactly what is happening to the body as a whole and what prescription protocols we should use.

Without "educated" opinion discussions we would not have any discussions at all. however, there are some fundamental ethical and professional lines that have been crossed with various "comercial" enterprises, which offer no subtantial evidence or choose to ignore the available evidece for monetary gain. These deserve to be lambasted.

That's just my opinion!

regards

__________________
Graham Curryer

None of us know what we are doing, but some of us know more about what we are not doing than others!::

Podiatry Arena is not a perfect forum, but it is currently the best forum in the world for the discussion of podiatric academic topics.

What do we have here on Podiatry Arena? We have individuals who come here hoping to sell their products, making outlandish claims with no research evidence. We have hundreds of lurkers who rarely, if ever, post to the forum. We have some very talented, experienced clinicians and researchers who take time out of their busy days to add their comments to many discussions. And, all this from an academic forum that is relatively uncensored.

People who make claims on this forum that are their opinions should be willing to back up their claims with some sort of evidence or simply let the reader know that they are only expressing an opinion, rather than stating a fact. If you want the more academic contributors to participate, then you must be willing to accept some of their peculiarities. Too much moderation spoils things in forums such as this, in my opinion. However, I agree that sometimes, things get out of hand here. Craig Payne and the other moderators have been very good at eliminating those offending messages.

Therefore, for all of you who don't like Podiatry Arena, then go search for the next few days or few weeks on the internet and try to find a better forum for academic podiatric discussions. If you find one, please let us know about it. Until then, we must all accept Podiatry Arena for what it is......a work in progress, not perfect, but the best there is.

__________________
Sincerely,

Kevin

**************************************************
Kevin A. Kirby, DPM
Adjunct Associate Professor
Department of Applied Biomechanics
California School of Podiatric Medicine at Samuel Merritt College

e-mail: kevinakirby@comcast.net

Private Practice:
107 Scripps Drive, Suite 200
Sacramento, CA 95825 USA
My location

Voice: (916) 925-8111 Fax: (916) 925-8136
**************************************************

Forums are just that, a place where people can relay just about anything on any subject. The reader needs to sift through all this.

"it's the internet!"

I think some forums are, due to the subject matter, are more professional than others, however that does not guarantee accuracy.

In this forum, different threads are treated differently and certainly if opinions differ I think it acceptable to ask for some "proof" or documentation.

For instance, when Kevin says he ran 13 marathons!!!! Well.......I believe it!!!! haha

This isn't science, but there is an awful lot that can be learned and gained by participating or just reading. Lots of experienced practitioners giving their two cents on various topics. Can you imagine, pre internet, getting almost immediate feedback on a question from practitioners literally from around the world?

Enjoy it.

Steve

I would concur with everything Kevin has said here..........being one of the less experienced pods out there this is a valuable source of information and help from experts within their field.
It might be prudent to express if it is a personal opinion so that others can either agree with what is said - new research project in the making? - or disagree without getting personal
A big thanks to all the posters on this forum for making everyone think and for my continued learning
Wendy

I think much depends on what we say, how it is said, and by whom.

If, for example, i said

"The insoles i produce are better than those produced by others"

or similar, I would expects to be flamed to a podiatrist mc nugget

If, on the other hand i said

"I've tried lots of techniques and based on my experiance this is what works best for me"

I would think that fair enough. And all too often that is the problem People who over-extrapolate personal opinion and experiance and state is as cold fact.

Sadly i also tend to look for vested interest. I think it was Martin Harvey who said that when he sees new research the first question he asked is "who paid for it".

There is no doubt that this is a robust forum. The standard of academic discussion and rigour is unmatched. That has moulded my thinking over the years and, i think, made my a better podiatrist. Certainly a more enquiring one.

One must consider the audience. If teaching undergrads one can say "it is thus" and they should beleive you based on your experiance. If offering your views to the very finest of the profession as fact i think it not unreasonable that you be ready to defend those views!

But, of course, all the above is only my opinion. I have no research to back it up .

Regards
Robert

I think it all come down to how it gets stated...

Don't forget Payne's First Law (* this law is currently under revision as those who it should mostly apply to are the least likely to realise it)

and Payne's Second Law: The problems arise in the interpretation of the Second Law. If someone is going to state an opinion, it often comes across as a statement of fact (esp in the context of the lack of evidence).

If someone is going to state an opinion or theory without evidence, then it should be:
1) theoretically coherent
2) biologically plausible
3) consistent with other evidence

Where we see the heated debates (eg Rothbart; Claims of orthotic superiority; etc) the theory (usually with a supporting product to sell) is not consistent with the above 3 criteria. No attempt is made by proponents of the approach to explain or answer the questions and the get dissmissive of the inconsistencies and then we see a string of users of the product posting testimonials, but still no one answers the questions --> the First Law comes into play (see this classic: Vertical Facial Dimensions Linked to Abnormal Foot Motion - the questions have still not been answered!).

The cult like following of some get treated with the contempt they deserve. It would be very different if the proponents actaully acknowledge anything that is a shortfall in terms of the 3 above, rather than be dismissive --- maybe if they did not, then we could all work together to fill up the gaps in the theroretical coherences and biological plausibilties.

Another thing, a lot of the advocates of different approaches neet to accept is that, just because Mert Root might have been on some aspects does not proove that you are right --- has anyone else noted that kind of argument entering into it? Approaches should stand on there own feet (excuse the pun!) - leave Root out of it.

Outlandish statements will be treated with contempt - unless they can meet the 3 criteria above.

One last thing: In the thread on Direct Mechanical vs. Neuromotor Effects of Foot Orthoses, there was this post (#44): ..that I was almost ready to launch into. How do you have any idea that it has anything to do with proprioception? Getting the met down, it what restabilshes the windlass! Surely the effect you are seeing is due to the windlass and nothing to do with proprioception; etc etc. The only reason I did not launch into the post was the IMHO (in my humble opinion) that Gavin started the post with. Maybe there is a lesson in that.

One more last thing: It also come down to etiquette. The way some who respond to messages could do with an etiquette lesson. Those who don't like the reponses just need to realise, well that is just the way they are.

Opinion, theories, ideas without evidence are fine. Just state them as such and don't pretend that they are something that they are not.

__________________
Craig Payne
Department of Podiatry
La Trobe University
Melbourne, Australia
http://www.latrobe.edu.au/podiatry
__________________________________________________ ___________________________________
God put me on this earth to accomplish a certain number of things - right now I am so far behind, I will never die.
The views expressed above are those of the author and not that of La Trobe University
This is where I am, where are you?

Thanks for your post Kevin, I agree wholeheartedly, but I think many of us "lurkers" have valuable opinions, good ideas and advice which they are too scared to post lest they get shot down in flames by some of the other, more aggressive/passionate/intolerant members.

Cheers,

Brad

__________________
My location

But surely the more agressive/passionate/intolerant responses are in direct response to the how unsubstantiated claims are made. I 'thanked' the post above by CP as the 3 points he noted and Paynies Law go a long way to explaining some of the responses. Those with commercial products to sell associated with their approach do seem to get special treatment and need to have a thicker skin.

Brad:

Sorry to hear that you and other lurkers are too scared to post in fear of getting "shot down in flames by some of the other, more agressive/passionate/intolerant members".....of which I am probably one.

Others have told me that they were afraid to ask me questions since they were "afraid of me". I don't know what they are afraid of......I'm a pussy cat.....to most who post on Podiatry Arena. And, Brad, what is the worst thing that could happen to you by posting to Podiatry Arena????

__________________
Sincerely,

Kevin

**************************************************
Kevin A. Kirby, DPM
Adjunct Associate Professor
Department of Applied Biomechanics
California School of Podiatric Medicine at Samuel Merritt College

e-mail: kevinakirby@comcast.net

Private Practice:
107 Scripps Drive, Suite 200
Sacramento, CA 95825 USA
My location

Voice: (916) 925-8111 Fax: (916) 925-8136
**************************************************

Payne's Laws should be taught at Uni! Might help develop some more critical thinking. Cynicism is healthy when it comes to science.

What really annoys me is when vested interests are not stated immediately and it only comes out after the discussion has already progressed. That type of trickery needs to be dealt with severely. When these same people then refuse to answer the hard questions then they have to accept a certain heightened level of attack.

Craig, I take it you meant to include the word "wrong" above. I find this tactic especially annoying when they try to split the world into only two options of Root or their new improved non Root model. As if everyone else is still stuck in the 1970's and 80's. If possible some online corporal punishment is then appropriate.

This is perhaps a totally different topic. I think rudeness has no place on the forum. Posters who launch unprovoked attacks just for the fun of attacking are trolls. What sort of personal satisfaction they get from denigrating others I am not sure. I think it is likely a reflection of the vacuum in their real lives that they must do this sort of grandstanding online. The problem can then be that we create a pack mentality and the animosity feeds on itself. This then scares off many who are not confident or experienced enough to participate. I think Podiatry Arena has ventured close to this abyss.

These trolls should be dealt with as severely as any lab owner with no evidence for their theories/products. Both types of posters can critically undermine the value and success of Podiatry Arena.

__________________
********************************
Steve Manning
Director - Runner - Podiatrist
Intraining Running Centre
Intraining Running Injury Clinic
33 Park Road Milton Qld 4064 AUSTRALIA
07. 3367 3088
www.intraining.com.au
footman@intraining.com.au

It happens all too often (see this one on Petros Kattou as an example)

The sad thing is that those with hidden agendas always get found out and called on it ... now do a google search for them or the topic .... Podiatry Arena ranks well for most of them now.

What they don't realise (and I have posted on this several times and they have not yet picked up on it), is that they should include an explicit link to their commercial interest in their signature and then just be a good "corporate citizen" and contribute for the good of the community here; post questions; post answers; get involved; etc; and earn the respect of the community .... then guess what - people will click on the link in their signature and maybe even try their product rather than alienate them with their unsupported claims and the cult like following that they want for "their" approach.

__________________
Craig Payne
Department of Podiatry
La Trobe University
Melbourne, Australia
http://www.latrobe.edu.au/podiatry
__________________________________________________ ___________________________________
God put me on this earth to accomplish a certain number of things - right now I am so far behind, I will never die.
The views expressed above are those of the author and not that of La Trobe University
This is where I am, where are you?

"Reference statements not opinions"
Question: when is a written opinion not a statement?

OED:

"statement: n. the act or instance of stating or being stated; expression in words.

opinion n. a belief or assessment based on grounds short of proof."

Given these definitions how does one express an opinion on this forum without making a statement?

If we ignore the Oxford English Dictionary and define "statement" as a "proven fact" and an opinion as "something that I think", how does one detect when a contributors written expression is based on grounds short of proof or is indeed a proven fact? In the absence of obvious proof one asks them to provide proof for something that they have written.

Take for example:
"To make an Orthotic, plaster bandage is wrapped around your foot while you're sitting or lying down on your back or stomach. Your foot is then held in its neutral position so it lines up with the rest of your leg. The cast is then balanced, poured and modified by adding plaster to the positive cast which is done to try and replicate what your foot would look like in a Corrected Weight Bearing Position ... is actually what is done."

Is this:
a) a statement?
b) an opinion?
c) both?

How do we find out the level of proof that the author can provide to support this statement?

Take another example,
"Most podiatrists are still doing exactly what the FAS website suggests."

Again it is unclear whether this is a proven fact or the subjective opinion of someone who has just made it up off the top off their head. In this scenario we may:

a) accept this to be a true statement
b) ask the originator of the post to support their conjecture with a "proof" so that we may determine whether it is a true or false statement
c) refute the posters claim with evidence to the contrary

This raises a larger argument regarding levels of evidence. But this has already taken more of my time than I'd intended to give.

__________________
Science is the antidote to the poison of enthusiasm and superstition

My location

I would wish this site to be a forum for clinicians, as well as academics. Certainly the clinician must be informed (by the academics), but clinical opinions backed by relevant experience, in my opinion, should be given fair credit. Clinicians can actually help researchers to obtain more meaningful outcomes for their research if properly involved.

Regrettably, I see a trend towards 'career defined by research' rather than 'career defined by doing the job'. This might reflect my age and background. However, having been there, I believe I understand the value of gaining experience from others, checking it out, adding to it and passing it down to others. This pattern has been applied by all social strata as long as people have been educated.

There are clinicians who cannot be directly involved in research. Not all are in lucrative private practice. They still work at the patient interface, have inquiring minds, regularly use thought process and are continually striving for better results. Some of this striving involves development of technique, establishment of clinical parameters and simply manipulation of instruments. These fundamentals are not always considered by researchers. For instance, a trial to determine the relative effectiveness of one dressing in relation to another can be skewed by the way in which the dressing is applied. This is just a silly example, but I hope it helps to make my case.

I am all for robust critism, and I would seek to robustly defend my opinions or any statement that I might make. However. we are not going to break much new ground if we have to continually report the findings of those who got to where we now stand before us. It seems right that we should examine closely and debate with passion. But I do feel that some of the naked aggression displayed is not professionally defensible.

I likewise am sorry to hear that some are nervous of posting.

I was once such a lurker. I was awed by the level of acheivment and prominance of the "Gods" of the forum (i still am). This was in Simons unreconstructed days, he used to be a good deal more aggressive (search if you don't beleive it). I think he was quitting smoking at the time. The expression "i've had better laughs peeling babies and rolling them in salt" in response to a post springs to mind. Quite scary.

I remember well the first times Kevin, Simon, Eric, Dave, Craig and others replied to questions i asked. Both terrifying and exciting to learn with such masters, but what an oppertunity! What a tradegy it would be to miss out for fear of the occasional bit of "hot tongue".

What i have learned in the intervening years is the following:-

People rarely get flamed if they approach the issue in an enquiring way.

For eg.
"You're doing it wrong" = Flame

"Can you tell me a bit about your thinking behind doing it that way" = No flame.

Flaming does not hurt. Happened to me a few times. Its no big thing.

Nobody ever gets flamed for asking a stupid question. There is no such thing. NOT asking a question is far more stupid.

People rarely ever gets flamed for stating an opinion so long as it is framed as an opinion. It gets sticky when somebody states an opinion as fact and expects others to beleive it without question (then gets sniffy when they don't).

So my advice to such lurkers is:-

DON'T be afraid to ask questions

DON'T be afraid to state opinions. Just preface them with "IMHO" or "In my experiance."

DON'T take it too seriously. The occasional crisping is not a big deal. Read the criticism with an open mind and either take the advice or discard it and move on.

DON'T miss out on the oppertunity this forum represents!

Regards
Robert

You should remember that in order to win you have to be prepared to lose.
How will your opinions or your knowledge be challenged and improved without criticism?

Dave

__________________
Descartes seems to consider here that beliefs formed by pure reasoning are less doubtful than those formed through perception.

I likewise am sorry to hear that some are nervous of posting.

I was once such a lurker. I was awed by the level of acheivment and prominance of the "Gods" of the forum (i still am). This was in Simons unreconstructed days, he used to be a good deal more aggressive (search if you don't beleive it). I think he was quitting smoking at the time. The expression "i've had better laughs peeling babies and rolling them in salt" in response to a post springs to mind. Quite scary.

I remember well the first times Kevin, Simon, Eric, Dave, Craig and others replied to questions i asked. Both terrifying and exciting to learn with such masters, but what an oppertunity! What a tradegy it would be to miss out for fear of the occasional bit of "hot tongue".

What i have learned in the intervening years is the following:-

People rarely get flamed if they approach the issue in an enquiring way.

For eg.
"You're doing it wrong" = Flame

"Can you tell me a bit about your thinking behind doing it that way" = No flame.

Flaming does not hurt. Happened to me a few times. Its no big thing.

Nobody ever gets flamed for asking a stupid question. There is no such thing. NOT asking a question is far more stupid.

People rarely ever gets flamed for stating an opinion so long as it is framed as an opinion. It gets sticky when somebody states an opinion as fact and expects others to beleive it without question (then gets sniffy when they don't).

So my advice to such lurkers is:-

DON'T be afraid to ask questions

DON'T be afraid to state opinions. Just preface them with "IMHO" or "In my experiance."

DON'T take it too seriously. The occasional crisping is not a big deal. Read the criticism with an open mind and either take the advice or discard it and move on.

DON'T miss out on the oppertunity this forum represents!

Regards
Robert

Offering input to stimulate debate is one thing - feeding the wolves is something else!

Why does it so often feel like the latter. Hunting for meat, or for sport?

I suggest that all those that are so worried about someone disagreeing with him/her on Podiatry Arena or "getting flamed" should start up their own website called Nice Only Podiatry Arena. In Nice Only Podiatry Arena a set of moderators would screen all postings so that no one could disagree with anyone, no one could question the ethics of people selling insoles with outlandish claims, and no one could point out that someone is wrong, since this wouldn't be nice and these comments may hurt the feelings of the poster. In addition, in Nice Only Podiatry Arena, no jokes or funny comments would be allowed that the moderators determine could be potentially unacceptable to anyone. That way, all of you who don't want any disagreements and want everyone to be happy can have a place you can enjoy visiting where no one will ever get their feelings hurt.

__________________
Sincerely,

Kevin

**************************************************
Kevin A. Kirby, DPM
Adjunct Associate Professor
Department of Applied Biomechanics
California School of Podiatric Medicine at Samuel Merritt College

e-mail: kevinakirby@comcast.net

Private Practice:
107 Scripps Drive, Suite 200
Sacramento, CA 95825 USA
My location

Voice: (916) 925-8111 Fax: (916) 925-8136
**************************************************

The word "debate" is key here. Is this a place of academic debate or a chat room or both? When does the chat turn into debate?

In my opinion a debate ensues when someone makes a debatable statement (see my post above regarding the lack of clear dichotomy between a "statement" and an "opinion". Hence, the poll at the top of this thread is fundamentally flawed) and is challenged to prove it.

Debatable statements = Statements with which other people might or might not agree . These are sometimes called "arguments", "assertions", "propositions" or "premises".
eg. FAS is the best way of casting the foot


Non-debatable statements = Statements with which no-one would normally disagree or argue. These are sometimes called "facts".
eg. The talus is a bone in the foot

The following link provides a basic overview of academic debate and how it is constructed:
http://www.nd.edu/~sheridan/DebateElements.pdf

Note the section on burden of proof:
"The affirmative team assumes the burden of proof, i.e., to prove that the proposition is probably true."

The negative team assumes the burden of rejoinder, i.e., to attack the affirmative team's arguments."

So when you write something and someone asks you to support what you've written it's because the reader believes that it is a debatable statement (proposition), the onus is then upon you to provide proof for that proposition. At which point you may, concede that you have no proof, provide proof that may stimulate the development of further propositions etc. It's not personal, it just how academic debate is constructed.

From my perspective it is annoying when individuals who write a debatable statement, ignore the call for them to support their proposition or assume the best form of defence for their proposition is offense. I'm sure I've been guilty of this myself.

Google academic debate, academic argument etc. Lot's on construction of essays, but you can easily extrapolate to what is going on at Podiatry Arena.

__________________
Science is the antidote to the poison of enthusiasm and superstition

My location

Kevin,

With all due respect, you have all the advatages - American, assertive, well-educated, good-looking?, wealthy? Aussies are also rather outspoken by British standards (generalisations, I admit). Some of us somewhat more reserved Brits find such assertion just a bit overwhelming. It doesn't make us a bunch of lily-livered milk-sops

We don't all share your confidence, or may have different understandings. We are ALL on a learning curve. Perhaps we should all reserve our greatest ire for those who do not post or make any input whatsoever, and there are tens of thousands of them.

I enjoy a modicum of cut and thrust with those who know more than I - but I do not enjoy being treated as a fool either. I too, get a buzz out of educating those who know less. It seems to me IMHO that a bit of mutual understanding goes a long way.

Further, it is not always edifying to see colleagues 'put-down' for daring to express alternative thoughts and ideas. Surely the ideas deserve consideration before throwing them away with apparent contempt.

This is a great forum. I'm pleased to be a part of it. But any forum depends ultimately on its posters. Perceived attitudes matter in my humble (not too humble) opinion.

A good example being Dr. Simon Spooner??

__________________
Sincerely,

Kevin

**************************************************
Kevin A. Kirby, DPM
Adjunct Associate Professor
Department of Applied Biomechanics
California School of Podiatric Medicine at Samuel Merritt College

e-mail: kevinakirby@comcast.net

Private Practice:
107 Scripps Drive, Suite 200
Sacramento, CA 95825 USA
My location

Voice: (916) 925-8111 Fax: (916) 925-8136
**************************************************

John:

I would love it if many more of the lurkers came out in the open here on Podiatry Arena to contribute to the discussions. However, in the last decade of contributing to Podiatry Arena and JISC Mailbase (i.e. podiatry internet forums), I have found there are always more lurkers than posters, and that only a small fraction of individuals post regularly to the forums. One must then ask the question, whose fault is it when a lurker stays a lurker and doesn't contribute to such valuable forums, even though this lurker has plenty to offer to all of us? Should we blame it on the frequent contributors because they disagree with other people on occasion? Or should we blame it on the lurkers for not being more bold in their actions and not be more willing to share their knowledge with others?

My opinion is that both are to blame. The frequent contributors need to be more nice and less confrontational in forums such as this to encourage more open debate and discussion since certainly it is no fun being made to look like a fool. In addition, the lurkers need to quit sitting on their hands so that we can get to know them better by contributing more. Let's not place the blame on only the frequent contributors or only on the lurkers, they both share a responsibility in improving the content and value of this wonderful academic forum so that it may be enjoyed by a larger number of individuals.

__________________
Sincerely,

Kevin

**************************************************
Kevin A. Kirby, DPM
Adjunct Associate Professor
Department of Applied Biomechanics
California School of Podiatric Medicine at Samuel Merritt College

e-mail: kevinakirby@comcast.net

Private Practice:
107 Scripps Drive, Suite 200
Sacramento, CA 95825 USA
My location

Voice: (916) 925-8111 Fax: (916) 925-8136
**************************************************

How not to conduct an academic debate
http://beta.collegehumor.com/video:1...tag:screaming/

__________________
Science is the antidote to the poison of enthusiasm and superstition

My location

I think Podiatry Arena is not just the best forum in the world for podiatry discussion but could also be the best in the world for any medical profession. But does that mean that it can not be better? Does that mean we should just accept it's flaws? Or if it is really a work in progress should we not try and make it better? Should we just accept the status quo or should we have the vision to see what more it can become?

I think it is easy to blame the lurkers for not participating. They do not really have a voice. They can not or have not told us why they do not post. While it is easy to guess our guesses are dependent on our perspective. What we need is a certain level of empathy that would bring the lurkers out. We need to put ourselves in their place. There are certainly enough posters who have already expressed their opinions on the intimidatory atmosphere on Podiatry Arena. Imagine what those who do not post are feeling. It is no use being in denial about the affect that the boorishness in posts is having on participation on this forum.

I think robust debate is essential to make Podiatry Arena work. It is how that debate is conducted that is important. I have seen many posts that are nothing short of an inflammatory attack. When they are started with derision and sarcasm then how can a meaningful debate ensue? There is a reason why sarcasm is the lowest form of wit. It brings the discussion down into the gutter and that is not where an academic discussion should be.

Imagine if instead of an online forum this was a conference panel discussion. How many of these posts would be acceptable forms of communication? How ****ing stupid would it look going on the offensive from the get go? I try to pretend that I am actually talking to someone when I am posting. That tends to temper my response. The problem is that when posting online we have none of the cues that normally inhibit unacceptable behaviour. We can not see the affect that our words are having on the recipient and more importantly we can not see the response of the spectators to our posts. If those cues were present then there would be a higher level of shame and we would have more patience and more civility in our replies. If things degenerated at a conference like they often have here then many of the audience would get up and leave. And IMHO that is what the lurkers are doing.

__________________
********************************
Steve Manning
Director - Runner - Podiatrist
Intraining Running Centre
Intraining Running Injury Clinic
33 Park Road Milton Qld 4064 AUSTRALIA
07. 3367 3088
www.intraining.com.au
footman@intraining.com.au

In forum management circles, there is a principle known as the 90-9-1 Theory that is widely discussed:
There are many strategies discused on how to change the numbers (eg the use of the Intro forum; etc)

__________________
Forum Rules |FAQ's | Earn CPD Points
Have you added your location to the map? (Map FAQ's)

"Sarcasm is said to be a low form of humour as its intent is generally to get laughs at someone else's expense. The pointed humour may not be funny to the victim but its funny to those who understand the barb as it feeds their intellectual egos. This is because sarcasm is a form of humour that is known to require the highest functions of our brains. Areas of the brain that decipher sarcasm and irony also process language, recognise emotions and help understand social cues. Sarcasm is related to our ability to understand other people's mental state so it's not just a linguistic form, it's also related to social cognition.
David Buley, Seaforth

Recent research at the University of Haifa claims that sarcasm is a complex high order skill needing an ability to understand other peoples state of mind and emotions. Its low because it targets chiefly the sensitive, inarticulate, unsophisticated and powerless.
Paul Roberts, Lake Cathie"

http://www.apa.org/journals/releases/neu193288.pdf

See also: http://www.j-sainsbury.co.uk/index.a...007&NewsID=881

Given that by definition sarcasm is a form of irony, look again at the statement: "sarcasm is the lowest form of wit". Do you see it now?

__________________
Science is the antidote to the poison of enthusiasm and superstition

My location

A lurkers point of view

Personally as a new grad I honestly believe I have nothing worth contributing. My knowledge of current academic papers is minimal and my clinical experience is almost non existent.

However, I had a particular interest in the 'Research parameters for evaluating casting methods' and may have put in my two cents worth as I have recently started working in a practice who use the FAS, that was until the sharks began circling. Unfortunately the thread degenerated into sarcasm and song lyric fights and as Steve recently pointed out in this thread, this is where this lurker lost interest, stopped gaining any knowledge and tuned out.

Now why would a lurker like myself venture into shark infested waters? I prefer to learn from a safe distance here on the safe beach thanks. :)

Cheers

Kevin I think you are totally misrepresenting the consensus here.

No one has said they want a cream puff site. One of the best things about Podiatry Arena is the heated debate. I think it just needs to be conducted with a little more maturity. That does not prevent passion or humour.

There can be good reasons for flaming someone - usually to shut down unacceptable behaviour by online trolls.
Some people need to be slapped down for what they have posted. see here

However unprovoked aggression and derision has no place IMHO on an academic website.

I know a few good podiatrists personally who are too intimidated to post a question much less advice. I would be surprised if every Podiatry Arena member could not easily find a colleague who felt the same way.

Do we want the website to be dominated by the lowest common denominator? How much of an impact do your future posts have when you have publicly embarrassed someone in front of their peers? You then have shut them down as a lurker as much as a participant. And the impact is not localised to that one person. Many more will be turned away by what they have read.

It comes down to whether you want to be remembered as the most valuable poster or one of the bully boys.
OPINION: People who where bullys at school grow up to be bullys as adults.
By the way I totally get the irony of posting something suggesting someone not embarrass others.

__________________
********************************
Steve Manning
Director - Runner - Podiatrist
Intraining Running Centre
Intraining Running Injury Clinic
33 Park Road Milton Qld 4064 AUSTRALIA
07. 3367 3088
www.intraining.com.au
footman@intraining.com.au