Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums

You are currently viewing our podiatry forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view all podiatry discussions and access our other features. By joining our free global community of Podiatrists and other interested foot health care professionals you will have access to post podiatry topics (answer and ask questions), communicate privately with other members, upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, access other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisements in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!

  1. Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
Dismiss Notice
Have you liked us on Facebook to get our updates? Please do. Click here for our Facebook page.
Dismiss Notice
Do you get the weekly newsletter that Podiatry Arena sends out to update everybody? If not, click here to organise this.

Level of Proof for Forums

Discussion in 'Podiatry Arena Help, Suggestions and Comments' started by Steve The Footman, Feb 1, 2009.

?

What level of proof for an opinion?

  1. Reference everything with links to studies

    1 vote(s)
    4.3%
  2. Reference statements not opinions

    12 vote(s)
    52.2%
  3. Reference only if requested by another member

    5 vote(s)
    21.7%
  4. Say anything you want and reference only if you want to.

    5 vote(s)
    21.7%
  1. Steve The Footman

    Steve The Footman Active Member


    Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.
    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?
     
  2. Phil Wells

    Phil Wells Active Member

    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
     
  3. Graham

    Graham RIP

    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
     
  4. 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.
     
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2009
  5. drsarbes

    drsarbes Well-Known Member

    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
     
  6. Wendy

    Wendy Active Member

    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
    :drinks Wendy
     
  7. 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
     
  8. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Articles:
    8
    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.
     
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2009
  9. dyfoot

    dyfoot Active Member

    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:drinks
     
  10. DaVinci

    DaVinci Well-Known Member

    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.
     
  11. 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????
     
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2009
  12. Steve The Footman

    Steve The Footman Active Member

    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.
     
  13. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Articles:
    8
    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.
     
  14. "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.
     
  15. Johnpod

    Johnpod Active Member

    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.
     
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2009
  16. 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:D. 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
     
  17. David Smith

    David Smith Well-Known Member

    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
     
  18. 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:D. 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
     
  19. Johnpod

    Johnpod Active Member

    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?
     
  20. 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.:rolleyes::boohoo::cool:
     
  21. 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.
     
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2009
  22. Johnpod

    Johnpod Active Member

    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:boxing:

    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.
     
  23. A good example being Dr. Simon Spooner??:rolleyes:
     
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2009
  24. 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.
     
  25. Steve The Footman

    Steve The Footman Active Member

    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.
     
  26. admin

    admin Administrator Staff Member

    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)
     
  27. "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.asp?PageID=424&section=&Year=2007&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?
     
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2009
  28. Stirling

    Stirling Active Member

    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
     
  29. Steve The Footman

    Steve The Footman Active Member

    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.;)
     
  30. What a ridiculous thing to say! you ignorant stupid...

    Sorry. Kidding.:D:drinks Big hug.

    Firstly well done for posting here. On this topic you have a unique perspective.

    A shame the hot tongue caused you to tune out. Sometimes you need to sift for the gold of knowledge in murky water. That thread is throwing up some very interesting stuff!

    You ask a valid question. Why would you venture into the shark infested waters. You also say something quite telling when you say you hav nothing worth contributing.

    My reply would be that you can contibute much if you have but the courage to venture forth. Because what you offer is that you have yet to learn that which many might take for granted! Often when the "sharks" get excited we can get ahead of ourselves and leave folk, and occasionally dare i day pragmatic common sense behind. Enter someone like you, who can say "sorry guys, what are you talking about again?"

    Asher asked such a question of me following a throwaway comment i unthinkingly made regading VLS. Made me stop and go back and try to explain my thinking. A few people thanked the post so she was obviously not the only one wondering! The thread and the community is enriched.

    You can contibute by asking the questions which most of your lurker brethren are itching to ask but are too embarressed to. You can start those threads which that community will find most useful.

    This is what you are uniquely placed to contribute which others cannot. Kevin Kirby himself, for all his vast knowledge experiance and skill, knows less about the wonderings of an inexperiance graduate than you!

    As to why to do it, i guarentee that you will get more from the discussions if you help to guide them. And as i have said the satisfaction you will gain from discussing your thoughts with the senior contributors is a feeling like no other. Just beware, its addictive!

    Regards
    Robert
     
  31. Relax, Steve, it was a joke!! Read my other, more serious postings if you want my real opinions.

    I totally agree.

    Whether my future posts on Podiatry Arena have an impact or not, is not why I post to Podiatry Arena. I post to Podiatry Arena in the attempt to help my colleagues with understanding the complexities of the human foot and lower extremity. For me, this isn't a popularity contest or a place where I am seeking "higher ratings". I just want to help my colleagues help their patients, but I certainly don't want someone telling me how I should do so, or I will just leave Podiatry Arena and find another place to educate clinicians. I already have too many writing commitments as it is.

    And by the way, Steve, I really don't care if people view me as a bully. If they feel that way about me, then that is their right. And as for the title of "most valuable poster", that is not something I asked for...it is a title that Craig Payne gave me. I don't need the title and if Craig wants to bestow that title on someone else, then I won't lose any sleep over it.
     
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2009
  32. Steve The Footman

    Steve The Footman Active Member

    I think you deserve the most valuable poster tag. Not just for the quantity of posts but also the quality. I am sure you have the best of intentions of helping to improve podiatry as a profession. Are there many other podiatrists that can say that they have succeeded at that as well as you? None that I know of. Certainly no other podiatrist has had a bigger impact on my own clinical practice.

    If I step out of line then I appreciate being told so.

    The problem of all written words is that it is difficult to pick up on the nuances. We can get carried away. So it sometimes helps to be reminded of another perspective.
     
  33. Steve:

    No hard feelings. I think this thread has been good for all of us and you are to be commended for starting it up so we can have this discussion. Every now and then, we must be able to take a few steps back to be able to see things more clearly and to allow us to see ourselves more clearly.

    There is another thing that I want to say regarding this thread. Simon Spooner and I have been very good friends for many years now. We have done research together, drank beer together and have had many good private discussions over the years. I understand his personality since we share a lot of traits and view things very similar to each other. I personally hope that Dr. Spooner continues to contribute to Podiatry Arena since he truly is one of the brightest podiatrists I know. Simon is not perfect, and he would be the first to admit it. However, it would be a great loss to Podiatry Arena, and to my enjoyment of this website, if he no longer took the time out of his day to contribute here.

    In that regard, maybe we will all learn something positive from this episode so that we can make Podiatry Arena a better and more enjoyable experience for all those involved, whether they be regular contributors, or lurkers.
     
  34. Steve The Footman

    Steve The Footman Active Member

    I certainly agree with you that Simon is a great podiatrist that has a lot to offer the profession on both podiatry arena and generally. This is what I said about Simon on that other thread:
    All I object to is the unbridled enthusiasm that has become the modus operandi for attacking others opinion for the sake of it. If it is objectionable behaviour in society or even in academia then it should be unacceptable here as well. I think that a certain amount of desensitisation has occurred over time. The negative postings have fed on themselves. I felt I needed to take a stand. It is now time for us all to take a step back as you said and decide what we want Podiatry Arena to be.

    I hope Simon continues to post, educate and entertain us. Other than yourself and Craig he is probably the most frequent poster on this messageboard. It would be a loss for many reasons if he stopped contributing. I would just like Simon and all of us to use a more civil tongue.
     
  35. And you do, far more than you realise!

    This is a fair point well made. Pod arena is not a resource people have to pay for. I don't know what the going rate WOULD be for an hour of one on one biomechanics training with the likes of Kevin, Simon, Dave. Eric or Craig but it should have lots of zeros on the end of it!



    And yet they give huge tracts of their time and expertise to help us individually for no reward but the satisfaction. Is the occasional bit of "hot tongue" a high price to pay? I think not!

    IMHO ;) we have absolutly no right to tell them HOW we would like that help to be formatted! When Gorden Ramsey turns up on your doorstep with a free fully prepared 5 course banquet it could be argued that it is a little ungrateful to complain that the plates are the wrong size or that he has trodden mud on your carpet... If Stephen Hawking rolled up at an O level Physics class in a school and started lecturing it would not be right to complain that he talks funny!

    It is, perhaps, a little too easy to take this forum for granted. These people are not beholden to "the community". I have always been willing to take a little ribbing for the oppertunity to learn at the feet of such leaders in the field, and i generally find that when i am corrected its for a damn good reason, and usually meant in right good fun if you don't take it personally!

    Regards
    Robert
    PS sorry if this post is a little harder than most of mine, i've been up half the night with the kids so i'm feeling a bit :boxing:
     
  36. "And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?" Matthew 7:3
     
  37. Johnpod

    Johnpod Active Member

    Robert

    You might like to read your own words and reflect:

     
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2009
  38. Steve The Footman

    Steve The Footman Active Member

    I think being a moderator is a difficult and thankless task. It is hard to know what impact every post will have on the success of the website. My opinion is that moderation should be about removing advertising and vulgarity only. Censorship for other reasons is a dangerous path to follow. Some threads do need to be closed when they are just going over the same stupid discussions. But it is better to let what has been said stand IMHO.

    The community itself can work together to establish the desired tone of the website. This thread is a focus on that but within each thread the response to posts can be equally effective.

    There are posting guidelines for Podiatry Arena however I doubt many people have read them much less follow them:
     
  39. Johnpod

    Johnpod Active Member

    Not sure I totally agree, Steve. Being a moderator may be difficult, but they choose to do it. It is not always thankless - indeed many of us genuinely appreciate having somewhere to share our points of view with colleagues unmet.

    Moderators (of this, and other forums), could improve their sites by reading their own forum rules - at least once a week. They could then apply them to all posts received. Having a sub-set of rules for 'old school friends and mates you work with' is not conducive to encouraging 'lurkers' and others to make contribution.
     
Loading...

Share This Page