or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccination Forum Guidelines Reminder and Discussion
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Vaccination Forum Guidelines Reminder and Discussion - Page 12

post #221 of 333
I think that's a great idea.
post #222 of 333

that could be a helpful thread stik, (probably contentious too)... but sounds like research forum will stay... which means that that thread would get buried under another 12 pertussis threads pretty much saying the same thing... the aspects of so and so study are crappy because... and here's an interesting biased article with 5 people waiting to tear it apart..

post #223 of 333

The tricky part would be persuading people to focus their remarks on the sites/sources only.  That takes some agreements about tone.  There could, of course, be disagreements about the value of a source, but to keep the thread constructive, those would have to be voiced as concerns about the source. 

 

So:

"How can you say that Offit is trustworthy?  Everyone knows that he is a profiteering ego-maniac who rolls in piles of money while fantasizing about injecting innocent children with pig DNA!" - Not going to be useful.  Maybe mods could agree to remove?

 

Alternately:

"I feel that Offit's conflicts of interest (he served on ACIP while the vaccine he invented was being approved), and his lack of response to concerns that Rotateq was contaminated with pig DNA demonstrate that he is primarily motivated by his own financial concerns." - Useful.  The concerns are clearly explained.  Plus, you can't really argue with "I feel . . ."  People feel how they feel.  Posters can respectfully disagree by posting their own feelings and the reasons for them. 
 

post #224 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by slmommy View Post

that could be a helpful thread stik, (probably contentious too)... but sounds like research forum will stay... which means that that thread would get buried under another 12 pertussis threads pretty much saying the same thing... the aspects of so and so study are crappy because... and here's an interesting biased article with 5 people waiting to tear it apart..

 

As we say in the history education biz, all the sources are biased.  The trick is to spot the biases and figure out how to use them constructively.

post #225 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by slmommy View Post

that could be a helpful thread stik, (probably contentious too)... but sounds like research forum will stay... which means that that thread would get buried under another 12 pertussis threads pretty much saying the same thing... the aspects of so and so study are crappy because... and here's an interesting biased article with 5 people waiting to tear it apart..


Unless we as the users decide to and commit to using the forum in a way that is more useful.
post #226 of 333

Which can be done.  No I promise everyone it can be done.

post #227 of 333

I'll give it a try.

post #228 of 333

OK, the idea has "likes" from both sides of the debate.  I'm going to consider the motion seconded.  I'll post a thread in the research forum that combines what I wrote in my two posts in re. the intent and how to post.  We'll see how it goes. 
 

post #229 of 333

dizzy.gif ok you guys.

 

Rach, btw wildkingdom and abby don't care for research forum sticking around, not just non-vaxers. keep it straight please.

post #230 of 333
Uh, ok?
post #231 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by slmommy View Post

dizzy.gif ok you guys.

 

Rach, btw wildkingdom and abby don't care for research forum sticking around, not just non-vaxers. keep it straight please.

I am confused.

 

The research can go bye-bye or we can alter it.  It seems altering it is our option.  There have been a couple of good suggestions, from links only, to post your site, with its details.

 

I do not think getting rid of non-vax or sel/delayed is on the table.  I sincerely hope not.  

post #232 of 333

I just think the only purpose of research is to fuel arguments, maybe not initially, but certainly now.

 

So we can try to pretend kumbaya is the goal around here, but I don't think we should kid ourselves.

post #233 of 333
Yeah Kathy those need to stay! The research forum with actual links and non agressive conversation would be really awesome. And honestly it was pretty decent in the beginning. I'm hoping it will find it's way back.
post #234 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by slmommy View Post

I just think the only purpose of research is to fuel arguments, maybe not initially, but certainly now.

 

 

So what do you propose?  Several posters have said they think research should go - but admin says "no."

 

We could boycott, I suppose.

 

Links and background info could be cool if we do not war.

 

The if is a biggie.  

 

I post fairly heavily on two forums that are somewhat closed at MDC - unschooling and non-vaxxing.  On both forums, it is pretty easy to cut out the inappropriate posts by reminding people "This is USing.  That is not appropriate here."  Honestly, it almost always works.  We might be able to do the same thing on research:  "This is research.  No debate here.  Please take it to vaccines".   

post #235 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imakcerka View Post

Yeah Kathy those need to stay! The research forum with actual links and non agressive conversation would be really awesome. And honestly it was pretty decent in the beginning. I'm hoping it will find it's way back.

 

 

The research forum is pretty new, when all is said and done.

 

It had a rocky start, but maybe it has not been given enough time.

 

I feel that <grin> research had a shaky launch.  No one really understood what it was supposed to look like.  We needed a template of sorts.   We are supposed to post research but not debate?  It was very confusing - when up until that point it has been very much along the lines of:

 

-want a debate - go hang out on vax

-want to discuss things with those who have made a similar choice to you - go to sel/del or non-vaxxed

 

Putting vaxxers and non-vaxxers together and expecting them not debate, when that is what historically happens, was odd.

post #236 of 333

Yep, good idea.

post #237 of 333
"This is research. No debate here. Please take it to vaccines". I think that will work. It does work for other forums.
post #238 of 333

Kathy, I concur.  Peggy seems devoted to keeping the forum.  Perhaps she could explain what she had in mind for the space?

post #239 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post

Kathy, I concur.  Peggy seems devoted to keeping the forum.  Perhaps she could explain what she had in mind for the space?

 

I can guess, but now I'm leaving for tonight sleepytime.gif

post #240 of 333
night night slmommy. Get some sleep for me!!!!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccination Forum Guidelines Reminder and Discussion