New Rules of Engagement
It is regrettable, but after some anonymous postings I feel have been inappropriate, there will now be comment moderation added to this site.
Anonymity continues to be a mode of expression I believe is worthwhile especially for individuals in subordinate positions. It allows them a voice they may not otherwise have.
But after yesterday’s anonymous posting, I will now moderate what gets posted and what does not.
The recent Board elections on Tuesday were not accepted well by a few individuals. I know this because I received a “not very nice” email from one of them blaming me for the outcome.
In addition, an anonymous poster wrote yesterday something I believe to be inappropriate. There were only ~20 people in the board room that were able to hear a speech given. An anonymous posting yesterday quoted directly from that speech and had to originate from someone inside the Board room.
This I find inappropriate. I have been and continue to be open in my disagreements with policies and certain decisions being made. I’ve encouraged open communication with anyone including Board members and administration wanting to discuss the issues.
Having someone in the administration or on the Board make anonymous comments will not be accepted on this blog. The readers have a right to know that some of these comments are originating from members of the administration and/or Board.
For the time being, all postings will be sent to my email address and will be screened. If I do not know the poster, it will be left to my discretion to publish it. I encourage anyone wanting to post anonymously to choose a screen name using the “other” category. I already know some of the more frequent posters identities. For the others, let me know who you are and I will gladly post your comments as appropriate.
Anonymity continues to be a mode of expression I believe is worthwhile especially for individuals in subordinate positions. It allows them a voice they may not otherwise have.
But after yesterday’s anonymous posting, I will now moderate what gets posted and what does not.
The recent Board elections on Tuesday were not accepted well by a few individuals. I know this because I received a “not very nice” email from one of them blaming me for the outcome.
In addition, an anonymous poster wrote yesterday something I believe to be inappropriate. There were only ~20 people in the board room that were able to hear a speech given. An anonymous posting yesterday quoted directly from that speech and had to originate from someone inside the Board room.
This I find inappropriate. I have been and continue to be open in my disagreements with policies and certain decisions being made. I’ve encouraged open communication with anyone including Board members and administration wanting to discuss the issues.
Having someone in the administration or on the Board make anonymous comments will not be accepted on this blog. The readers have a right to know that some of these comments are originating from members of the administration and/or Board.
For the time being, all postings will be sent to my email address and will be screened. If I do not know the poster, it will be left to my discretion to publish it. I encourage anyone wanting to post anonymously to choose a screen name using the “other” category. I already know some of the more frequent posters identities. For the others, let me know who you are and I will gladly post your comments as appropriate.
posted by Anonymous at 6:11 AM
13 Comments:
Regarding:
"Having someone in the administration or on the Board make anonymous comments will not be accepted on this blog. The readers have a right to know that some of these comments are originating from members of the administration and/or Board."
I am not part of the hospital so I know nothing about the source of the information you mentioned, but I have to tell you that your comment above strikes me as VERY selective enforcement regarding sources of information, including confidential information. You had no hesitation accepting and using (on a selective and incomplete basis) information contained in a letter to the board that had to have been revealed to you by a board member who violated his responsibility to maintain confidentiality. By now deciding what gets posted and not posted on your blog, those of us who feel that your personal animosity toward the current CEO overwhelms your ability to see other sides of issues will have no faith that anything like a full airing of issues will occur on your blog.
In response to diogenstrainee,
You are again making assumptions you cannot validate. I have offered to talk with you personally before. I am giving you another opportunity here to call me, email me etc.
I will request from this point forward that you either identify yourself publicly or personally to myself otherwise your comments will not be posted.
Your term of selective is accurate. That is the priveledge of being the blog administrator and many other blogs adhere to similar policies.
Isn't the pot calling the kettle black here?
It appears acceptable to you for you to relay what goes on during a board meeting (e.g. - the vote count, other elected positions, etc.) on this blog, but you now prohibit others.
If one piece of information is deemed good enough for public consumption then all information (other than truly confidential information) should be as well.
Query: Are board minutes public record?
Mr. Page,
Minutes are public record except for the executive session minutes. Unfortunately they are not distributed very freely and are scant in what they say about the public issues.
I do not mind discussing issues and decisions that the board makes regarding the hospital that are part of the public record. It is a county owned hospital and the public should have information related to these decisions.
This information is vital to everyone who has a stake in the success of Floyd
The personal remarks/attacks against me are fine as I open myself up for them. Personal remarks/attacks against other individuals who are not "public figures" become inappropriate.
There is a big difference between challenging decisions about programs, hiring tactics, financial status, layoffs, billing problems, staffing, and diversion issues from attacking the individual.
Let's challenge individuals on their decisions related to the topics and try to avoid the personal characterizations to individuals that are not "public figures".
Everyone is entitled to their opinions and positive encouraging remarks are always welcome. Negative comments from anonymous posters are not helpful unless readers understand the biases behind the remarks.
.
I agree with your comments regarding personal attacks and have made that comment numerous times on other bogs. I also personally believe that a person who cannot keep personal feelings apart from business decisions should not be stewards of the public (and usually are not good stewards).
BTW - I never got the chance to read the deleted comments, so my comments are based on principle, not as a direct response to the postings.
I feel that I must write in defense of HB.
Anyone who has read this blog for some length of time knows that HB and I do not often agree. At times, somewhat heatedly. However, he has been "out" for quite some time. He came to the first Meet 'n Greet knowing that he was probably going to be the only conservative there. HB and I met, face to face, for the first time there. As HB and I were talking, someone walked up and said that he wished he had brought his camera. He wanted a picture of HB and me not punching each other!!
He has the courage of his convictions, even if he is mostly wrong.(smile) I sincerely doubt that he will censor without good reason and that is said with all seriousness.
HB, I've seen comments on here recently about how FMHHS's financial statements are only not really made public and now you've said about the Board meeting minutes: "Unfortunately they are not distributed very freely and are scant in what they say about the public issues."
How is this allowed to continue, and whose responsibility is it to rectify it?
Obviously the intruige at the top has everyone on edge. Making cutting comments, casting suspicions and provoking fear are childish ways to deal with our lack of knowlege and uncertainty. We have to grow up and learn to think before we speak. Sometimes I wish I had a "moderator" to stop me from making foolish comments that I might regret later.
I do not think there is anyone to blame for the lack of public disclosure.
Our society and government has created the current method of limiting information. It happens at the city level, county level, state and federal levels.
No one from the public ever comes to a meeting and therefore it becomes very easy to get into a habbit of taking the easy and nonconfrontational way out.
As concerned citizens, employees, physicians etc, we need to ask questions, challenge ideas and expect more than just the status quo.
I rejected an earlier comment by an anonymous responder because of the emotional discourse.
In summary they stated:
“Although not part of administration or the board, after reading today's blog and now censored comments, one can only laugh in response.”
They accused me of “NEVER” being open or willing to discuss issues with departments I criticize and accused me of only taking a “select”
group of disgruntled physicians out to dinner with the new Board members.
The last complaint was that during the first few days of the institution of this blog I was anonymous and they felt this was inappropriate.
My response is as follows:
With the passion and emotion of the posting, I chose to only publish the pertinent complaints and leave the adjectives and other comments out.
The physicians invited to the dinner were all active members of the staff who overall are not disgruntled but legitimately concerned about specific issues. There were at least a dozen other physicians who wanted to attend but because of time constraints we limited the number.
As far as the not being willing to discuss issues is an amazing statement. Every issue brought up here has been brought up in many meetings and committees and with several people in administration and the Board. These are all well documented in the minutes of these meetings and committees and can be readily validated.
If anonymous commenters want their remarks posted, they will need to either keep the remarks civil and provide an identity. My email is listed in my profile and you are encouraged to let me know who you are.
Healthblogger said..."The physicians invited to the dinner were all active members of the staff who overall are not disgruntled but legitimately concerned about specific issues."
As one old time politician once stated "every sea change begins with throwin the rascal's out; unfortunatlely we were the rascals this time." Disagreement is healthy, concern is admirable, but every thing that go's around comes around. One must be careful not to become what we are fighting( secretive, uncooperative and unwilling to recognize given authority.)
Your new policy to expose your anonymous contributors will certainly bias your blog. After all the comments you have made over the years regarding the value of free speech, it seems shocking to me to see you limit something you enjoy so much of.
Furthermore -- I certainly don't agree with anyone offering up a peronsal attack but to restrict "all" for the sins of one is the exact thing you complain about at least 10 times a year.
You should re-read your "new rules" post. As an outsider looking in -- your comments are very disturbing...
HB -
I missed this post while out of town, so I'm late arriving to the party.
I'm mixed on your decision regarding anonymous posts. I truly agree that allowing "anonymous" posters to take personal shots & attacks at the expense of others cannot be tolerated in any public forum or media outlet. I was always very supportive of the other local blog-masters refusal to allow anonymous posts.
This blog, however, is different. The one thing that I admired about this blog is that you did openly allow many contrary viewpoints to be expressed, often ones critical of you. It takes a strong person to stand publicly as you have and take the praise, along with the heat. Its not an easy thing to do, and you have done so with grace and dignity.
From following the posts here, I gather that there are a lot of people who read this blog and who want to participate, but for the good of their own job, cannot do so "publicly", as you and I are able to do. So long as they do so with a requisite amount of respect and decorum, I think it might be a needed thing to allow others to share their views, information and thoughts.
My concern is that by moderating the posts, the perception of openness and integrity of the blog will be diminished by those who claim you're playing the role of "big brother" and controlling the information. I think this blog is not only interesting, its important to all of us in Floyd County, paying tax dollars, or needing the services provided by FMH.
My suggestion is simply to modify your position that any posts with PERSONAL attacks will be deleted. Its one thing to question the direction that FMH is heading under its leadership; I think you have done that in a very professional manner - you've never been disrespectful or condescending towards those whose opinions you question.
I would just hate to see your blog characterized as one sided, when I think its been a great forum for many people (including me) to come and learn more than what we hear on the street.
Just my two cents.
<< Home