 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Dentistry / May 2007The history of our newsgroup
A decade ago, our newsgroup was *very much* different that it is today for many reasons. To those who are newcomers, those reasons are obscure ... even if the newcomers went to the great Google-god asking for evidence that would prove that today's threads differ from threads of years; if not decades, gone by. I'm one of those people who identifies with "anniversaries". Whether it was 14 years ago that smd became an official newsgroup in usenet or whether it was eleven years ago since some other event took place ... it might just be Webby who is the one who tallies up time. Readers of our newsgroup might think or post the question, "why does it matter if we mark time?" Well ... why does it take nine months gestational time to produce a full-term newborn? (Mother's Day is on Sunday.) Why does it take a particular curriculum to complete a particular degree? Anyway, ... time is what proves the test of time. I, probably just like may others reading this, ... I pay attention to the comings and goings of the posters to sci.med.dentistry. I also keep an eye on alt.support.jaw-disorders ("my baby") ... and I wonder when and why people who strike out at posters, with the assumption that a handle such as "newbie" is actually a newbie, ... I wonder when they got onboard this cyber-expedition. This post isn't about dentistry. But it is about how dentistry is being discussed in usenet. Would any of our old-regulars (no age mentioned) or new-arrivals (no age mentioned) care to discuss the value of this particular global forum to the profession of dentistry and to the patients (whom are also dental professionals when necessary)? It's just an idea of mine. What do "you all" (y'all) think? Webby In article <tmjiatroepidemic-9D7551.14452511052007@news.phx.highwinds-media.com>, > A decade ago, our newsgroup was *very much* different that it is today > for many reasons. To those who are newcomers, those reasons are obscure [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > Webby Here's an example of someone else who took notice of the passing of time: > Hello Dental Netters, > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > and answers, medico-legal issues, and any other related dentistry > discussion. Webby > A decade ago, our newsgroup was *very much* different that it is today > for many reasons. To those who are newcomers, those reasons are obscure [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > Webby This is a wonderful site.......I have read many wonderful posts in this newsgroup. People has been very helpful.....especially Webby Just to said Thanks Albert in dallas > > A decade ago, our newsgroup was *very much* different that it is today > > for many reasons. To those who are newcomers, those reasons are obscure [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > Just to said Thanks > Albert in dallas And I thank you, Albert, for participating. If all we do is "talk" to ourselves ... there is very little point to the whole thing. And I also thank you for what I consider a personal compliment. Sincerely, Webby > In article <1178920868.732800.33...@u30g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, > [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > > - Show quoted text - You are absolutely right......internet has change the way we practicing dentistry.........This is a valuable site for me to seek advice and answer.......Thank you and others for this opportunity......The honor is mine... Sincerely Albert I guess its just the great discussions that brought me back to smd after a break of several years. My life is also a little more stable now after a family tragedy. I've learned a lot from our discussions......NTI, Monodont, just to name a few. Also many great discussions about everyday life with dentists and nondentists alike. The group is a nice "get away" during my wind-down time, usually at the end of the day. John > I guess its just the great discussions that brought me back to smd after a > break of several years. My life is also a little more stable now after a [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > John I'm sure I'm not alone when I say that I'm glad you're here with us in smd. Webby >A decade ago, our newsgroup was *very much* different that it is today > for many reasons. To those who are newcomers, those reasons are obscure [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > Webby From: Chas (c...@nochange.com) Subject: Re: Jan Drew View: Complete Thread (139 articles) Original Format Newsgroups: sci.med.dentistry Date: 2002-08-03 11:01:17 PST *My goodness! You really ARE a stalker! *Jan - report this bitch to her ISP: * a...@mesadrive.com "Sabra Broock" <s...@mesadrive.com> wrote in message news:3d4c0b06.14555656@news.mesadrive.com... > http://www.1stcong.sarasota.fl.us/bulletin/bulletin.h MID HI IS WILLING TO WORK FOR YOU! >>The MID HI would like to remind everyone the RENT-A-KID program is still >>in [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >This is a nosey biddy body who is a trouble maker, and has no regard for an >innocent person. I called the church to protect this lady and let them know stories were being made up about her that could damage her reputation. =========== Plus a few threats: She would feel more comfortable but she might be having a few problems Just a note: I own the following domain: scimeddentisty.com *and* I intend to utilize it. You should think about why. LL/Jan Nothing relevant, except an example to those in the know of one of the problems of the group. KACHING!! - $1 (For an explanation of KACHING!!, see http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/msg/829efa180a598f7a)  SignaturePeter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com > Nothing relevant, except an example to those in the know of one of the > problems of the group. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > (For an explanation of KACHING!!, see > http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/msg/829efa180a598f7a) Peter, that is an incredible idea all the way around. Good work. Webby >> Nothing relevant, except an example to those in the know of one of the >> problems of the group. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Webby Liars stick together, neither does Ms busy body suckup know anything about it, yet as is good work. What a fake. The Truth. http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/browse_thread/thread/f61f 9214146236a6/f85565bf02b38bad?lnk=st&q=A+Lesson+from+Ben+Kolb&rnum=1# The LIES. http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/browse_thread/thread/67ef 197655dfd78e/dad3e8a1f7552915?hl=en#dad3e8a1f7552915 http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/msg/38c43d0ea501a06e?hl=en& From: John Bain (jbai...@aol.com) Subject: Re: Bringing up children View: Complete Thread (62 articles) Original Format Newsgroups: misc.health.alternative Date: 2002-06-30 08:10:06 PST "Karuna" <kuru...@ihug.com.au> writes: >Shock! Shame! Horror! ... It is called discussion. I had this rather >wierdo idea that mha was kind of a discussion group. It cannot be a useful discussion group when participants deliberately set out to deceive and remain unchallenged. The point of the Ben Kolb item, which was an article about the Dateline TV programme, was not an attack on the doctors involved in the Ben Kolb case, but a discussion of the problem in getting safety information to doctors. The point was made that airlines have well defined procedures for this. CM does not. The doctors involved in the case gave a presentation explaining what went wrong, but a check on hospitals made by the Dateline researchers revealed that the 'procedure' that led to the death was still being carried out. Seems perfectly simple doesn't it. But Jan was accused of using the Ben Kolb case to divert attention. You have seen Peter B's statement which is a deliberate attempt to deceive. He may well know someone, somewhere who has used the Ben Kolb case to 'divert', but Jan did not and no-one else here has done so. Jan challenged Peter as having lied about this and whenever she sees another 'lie' from Peter, lists the lies he made about her, including the Ben Kolb case, which he has not withdrawn. Again, this is not an attempt to divert, but a challenge to a 'liar' who repeats his 'lies' to deceive other posters. He seems to have deceived you. The other challenge to Jan's original post was that this was not a 'procedure' in medical terms so the entire article must be incompetent and not worth reading. But the article was a heavily edited transcript of the TV programme, and that programme has not been challenged. It was also claimed that the participants did not say the things the article suggested, because their words were not included in inverted commas. But again this was a transcript of a TV programme which Jan watched and the participants said those things on the programme. All Jan has going for her is passion. Her opponents are often very clever deceivers, their statements may be factually accurate, but they are not 'the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth' and their intention is to mislead. Their attitude seems to be that the ends, discrediting AM, justify the means. And it works. Jan's 'line' is often distorted and she does get the 'wrong end of the stick' sometimes, and if you jump into the middle of a thread, it is so easy to assume that the other side is the voice of reason rather than deliberate deception, particularly when other posters, who have been already deceived, join in and miss the point. Best wishes SignatureJohn Bain From: John Bain (jbai...@aol.com) Subject: Re: As dense as, well, mercury View: Complete Thread (14 articles) Original Format Newsgroups: misc.health.alternative Date: 2002-12-20 08:53:43 PST Peter Bowditch <pet...@ratbags.com> writes: >For those who came in late, I was accused of lying for pointing out to >Jan that words have meanings and that the word "procedure" has a [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >practice of documenting which leg to cut off but does not in any way >invalidate the surgical procedure of amputation. No Peter, you were accused of deliberate wordplay to deny the conclusions of the programme. Whether the reporter used the words procedure or practice is quite irrelevant, the programme made it quite clear what the problem was. Remember this Re: Lying topic titles From: J BainSI To: misc.health.alternative Date: 28/02/2002 Peter Bowditch <pet...@ratbags.com> writes: >Yet again I am accused of lying by "twisting" the Ben Kolb story. >Here, once again, are my comments about this tragedy. >1) That Ben Kolb died is a tragedy. He died because of a mistake >arising from a dangerous practice of decanting chemicals into unmarked >containers. Quite correct, but nothing to do with the issue. The point is that there is no procedure in place to ensure that this does not happen again. The particular hospital involved has instituted procedures, but experts have said that this procedure is still being carried out in other hospitals. It is unlikely to change until a similar accident happens at those other hospitals. Or Mark P is called in to point out the error of their ways<g> That is the point. CM does not learn by it's mistakes, only individual practitioners do. The point was made that the airline business is tightly regulated so that this type of accident is not repeated. No such system exists in CM or AM. But let's put CM's house in order first. >2) >3) >4) >5) >6) >7) All irrelevant to the point of the article. >I am still waiting for jan to succinctly state where I "lied", without >discussing semantics. I am also still waiting for a simple "yes" or >"no" answer to the question of whether she believes that Tim Bolen >tells lies. I believe that Tim 'tells lies', just as I believe you 'tell lies' The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth is required here. You deliberately omitted the point of the article above in an attempt to deceive your readers. You succeeded with one of the Marks. Do you not consider deliberate deception as lying? Or is it OK if it bolsters your beliefs and helps persuade others that your beliefs are the True Beliefs? So, I would put you and Tim in the same category. That makes you a 'liar'. -------------------------------------- Best wishes SignatureJohn Bain UK TV Sound Director, magnotherapy user & distributor http://members.aol.com/JBainSI/Magnotherapy.html Surround Sound for Television ==== $5 - every time Jan abuses the memory of Jesse Gellsinger Never ever happened, Peter is a liar. http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/msg/38c43d0ea501a06e?hl=en& $1 - every time Jan accuses me of lying It is a proven fact you are a liar. $1 - every time Jan claims without evidence that someone is a disbarred lawyer Very good,evidence it in fact was Mark Probert. Peter is trying to protect anpther confirmed liar. === $5 - every time Jan promotes an anti-vaccination liar web site Do note the word *promotes* The truth is I post a web site that is very truthful and shows the risks, . ===== [Beginning to get the picture? Peter is afraid of the truth. http://www.909shot.com/Kids/terry.htm http://www.909shot.com/Kids/anna.htm http://www.909shot.com/Kids/nicky.htm http://www.909shot.com/Kids/richie.htm 5 - every time Jan promotes a chelation quackery web site Chelation is not quackery http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/msg/d051412dfb4cfc78?&hl= en&q=jdrew63929%40aol.com+James+P+Carter+chelation+++ $1 - every time Jan uses the solecism "mercury amalgam" 235 Mentions od Mertions of Mercury Amalgams on Medlline $1 - every time Jan defends an ignoramus just because said ignoramus has something to say against real medicine *In your opinion*. Of course....it is A OK for Peter to constantly says things again alternative medicine. $1 - every time Jan promotes or defends Scientology in any of its forms I could care less about /scientology. People have the right to make their own choices. Scientology is used as a scrape goat on newsgroups, I do think they are spot on about ADHD. As anyone can see, Peter has a control problem. He picked this sicko up from Rich Shewmaker, he is paying himself,. What a farce. He needs to grow up. >>> Nothing relevant, except an example to those in the know of one of the >>> problems of the group. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >Liars stick together, neither does Ms busy body suckup know anything about KACHING!! - $1 >it, yet as is good work. >What a fake. [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] >programme, was not an attack on the doctors involved in the Ben Kolb case, >but KACHING!! - $5 - Abusing the memory of Ben Kolb <snip ancient history, but not history of this newsgroup> Ben Kolb doesn't post here. KACHING!! - $1 SignaturePeter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com >> Nothing relevant, except an example to those in the know of one of the >> problems of the group. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Webby The Truth. http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/browse_thread/thread/f61f 9214146236a6/f85565bf02b38bad?lnk=st&q=A+Lesson+from+Ben+Kolb&rnum=1# The LIES. http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/browse_thread/thread/67ef 197655dfd78e/dad3e8a1f7552915?hl=en#dad3e8a1f7552915 http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/msg/38c43d0ea501a06e?hl=en& From: John Bain (jbai...@aol.com) Subject: Re: Bringing up children View: Complete Thread (62 articles) Original Format Newsgroups: misc.health.alternative Date: 2002-06-30 08:10:06 PST "Karuna" <kuru...@ihug.com.au> writes: >Shock! Shame! Horror! ... It is called discussion. I had this rather >wierdo idea that mha was kind of a discussion group. It cannot be a useful discussion group when participants deliberately set out to deceive and remain unchallenged. The point of the Ben Kolb item, which was an article about the Dateline TV programme, was not an attack on the doctors involved in the Ben Kolb case, but a discussion of the problem in getting safety information to doctors. The point was made that airlines have well defined procedures for this. CM does not. The doctors involved in the case gave a presentation explaining what went wrong, but a check on hospitals made by the Dateline researchers revealed that the 'procedure' that led to the death was still being carried out. Seems perfectly simple doesn't it. But Jan was accused of using the Ben Kolb case to divert attention. You have seen Peter B's statement which is a deliberate attempt to deceive. He may well know someone, somewhere who has used the Ben Kolb case to 'divert', but Jan did not and no-one else here has done so. Jan challenged Peter as having lied about this and whenever she sees another 'lie' from Peter, lists the lies he made about her, including the Ben Kolb case, which he has not withdrawn. Again, this is not an attempt to divert, but a challenge to a 'liar' who repeats his 'lies' to deceive other posters. He seems to have deceived you. The other challenge to Jan's original post was that this was not a 'procedure' in medical terms so the entire article must be incompetent and not worth reading. But the article was a heavily edited transcript of the TV programme, and that programme has not been challenged. It was also claimed that the participants did not say the things the article suggested, because their words were not included in inverted commas. But again this was a transcript of a TV programme which Jan watched and the participants said those things on the programme. All Jan has going for her is passion. Her opponents are often very clever deceivers, their statements may be factually accurate, but they are not 'the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth' and their intention is to mislead. Their attitude seems to be that the ends, discrediting AM, justify the means. And it works. Jan's 'line' is often distorted and she does get the 'wrong end of the stick' sometimes, and if you jump into the middle of a thread, it is so easy to assume that the other side is the voice of reason rather than deliberate deception, particularly when other posters, who have been already deceived, join in and miss the point. Best wishes SignatureJohn Bain From: John Bain (jbai...@aol.com) Subject: Re: As dense as, well, mercury View: Complete Thread (14 articles) Original Format Newsgroups: misc.health.alternative Date: 2002-12-20 08:53:43 PST Peter Bowditch <pet...@ratbags.com> writes: >For those who came in late, I was accused of lying for pointing out to >Jan that words have meanings and that the word "procedure" has a [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >practice of documenting which leg to cut off but does not in any way >invalidate the surgical procedure of amputation. No Peter, you were accused of deliberate wordplay to deny the conclusions of the programme. Whether the reporter used the words procedure or practice is quite irrelevant, the programme made it quite clear what the problem was. Remember this Re: Lying topic titles From: J BainSI To: misc.health.alternative Date: 28/02/2002 Peter Bowditch <pet...@ratbags.com> writes: >Yet again I am accused of lying by "twisting" the Ben Kolb story. >Here, once again, are my comments about this tragedy. >1) That Ben Kolb died is a tragedy. He died because of a mistake >arising from a dangerous practice of decanting chemicals into unmarked >containers. Quite correct, but nothing to do with the issue. The point is that there is no procedure in place to ensure that this does not happen again. The particular hospital involved has instituted procedures, but experts have said that this procedure is still being carried out in other hospitals. It is unlikely to change until a similar accident happens at those other hospitals. Or Mark P is called in to point out the error of their ways<g> That is the point. CM does not learn by it's mistakes, only individual practitioners do. The point was made that the airline business is tightly regulated so that this type of accident is not repeated. No such system exists in CM or AM. But let's put CM's house in order first. >2) >3) >4) >5) >6) >7) All irrelevant to the point of the article. >I am still waiting for jan to succinctly state where I "lied", without >discussing semantics. I am also still waiting for a simple "yes" or >"no" answer to the question of whether she believes that Tim Bolen >tells lies. I believe that Tim 'tells lies', just as I believe you 'tell lies' The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth is required here. You deliberately omitted the point of the article above in an attempt to deceive your readers. You succeeded with one of the Marks. Do you not consider deliberate deception as lying? Or is it OK if it bolsters your beliefs and helps persuade others that your beliefs are the True Beliefs? So, I would put you and Tim in the same category. That makes you a 'liar'. -------------------------------------- Best wishes SignatureJohn Bain UK TV Sound Director, magnotherapy user & distributor http://members.aol.com/JBainSI/Magnotherapy.html Surround Sound for Television ==== $5 - every time Jan abuses the memory of Jesse Gellsinger Never ever happened, Peter is a liar. http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/msg/38c43d0ea501a06e?hl=en& $1 - every time Jan accuses me of lying It is a proven fact you are a liar. $1 - every time Jan claims without evidence that someone is a disbarred lawyer Very good,evidence it in fact was Mark Probert. Peter is trying to protect anpther confirmed liar. === $5 - every time Jan promotes an anti-vaccination liar web site Do note the word *promotes* The truth is I post a web site that is very truthful and shows the risks, . ===== [Beginning to get the picture? Peter is afraid of the truth. http://www.909shot.com/Kids/terry.htm http://www.909shot.com/Kids/anna.htm http://www.909shot.com/Kids/nicky.htm http://www.909shot.com/Kids/richie.htm 5 - every time Jan promotes a chelation quackery web site Chelation is not quackery http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/msg/d051412dfb4cfc78?&hl= en&q=jdrew63929%40aol.com+James+P+Carter+chelation+++ $1 - every time Jan uses the solecism "mercury amalgam" 235 Mentions od Mertions of Mercury Amalgams on Medlline $1 - every time Jan defends an ignoramus just because said ignoramus has something to say against real medicine *In your opinion*. Of course....it is A OK for Peter to constantly says things again alternative medicine. $1 - every time Jan promotes or defends Scientology in any of its forms I could care less about /scientology. People have the right to make their own choices. Scientology is used as a scrape goat on newsgroups, I do think they are spot on about ADHD. As anyone can see, Peter has a control problem. He picked this sicko up from Rich Shewmaker, he is paying himself,. What a farce. He needs to grow up. >>> Nothing relevant, except an example to those in the know of one of the >>> problems of the group. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >The LIES. I've told you, Jan, that you don't get two KACHING donations to ACAHF by simply repeating the claim that I am a liar. <snip repetition> SignaturePeter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com "Peter Bowditch" <myfirstname@ratbags.com> wrote : I intend to ignore Jan except where the possibility of rational discussion seems to arise from something that she says. >"Peter Bowditch" <myfirstname@ratbags.com> wrote : > >I intend to ignore >Jan except where the possibility of rational discussion seems to arise >from something that she says. You forgot to mention when I said that or in what context, Jan. Are you being a little deceitful? http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.alternative/msg/25d959d0b17ffc2d "There will be no KACHING!! program for January. I intend to ignore Jan except where the possibility of rational discussion seems to arise from something that she says. I will also thank her every time she provides a link to any of my web sites". As anyone can see, I was talking about the month of January 2007 only. As far as I can tell, it is now May. Of course, you were implying that I was lying when I said that, so: KACHING!! - $1 and I can't see what it had to do with the history of this newsgroup, so: KACHING!! - $1 SignaturePeter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com Would any of our old-regulars (no age mentioned) >or new-arrivals (no age mentioned) care to discuss the value of this >particular global forum to the profession of dentistry and to the >patients (whom are also dental professionals when necessary)? It's just >an idea of mine. What do "you all" (y'all) think? > >Webby See my separate "Thanks!" post which I wrote before I saw this. > Would any of our old-regulars (no age mentioned) > >or new-arrivals (no age mentioned) care to discuss the value of this [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Webby > See my separate "Thanks!" post which I wrote before I saw this. Wow. It's amazing when things like that happen in the newsgroups (It happens to me more often than some may think!) Kind of causes you to wonder... ;-) I sure do hope your situation settles into one that is ultimately acceptable to you. Best wishes. Webby When I needed advice for a crown this newsgroup helped me. Thanks, Frank In article <tmjiatroepidemic-9D7551.14452511052007@news.phx.highwinds-media.com>, > This post isn't about dentistry. But it is about how dentistry is being > discussed in usenet. Would any of our old-regulars (no age mentioned) > or new-arrivals (no age mentioned) care to discuss the value of this > particular global forum to the profession of dentistry and to the > patients (whom are also dental professionals when necessary)? It's just > an idea of mine. What do "you all" (y'all) think? For years I have been pestering the pros here with some pretty dumb questions, and have always received courteous, informative replies for which I am grateful. I appreciate the help, and if I've neglected to thank anyone for their opinion, let me make up for that here: Thank you! Signature"Did Father shoot him? I will eat Grandfather for dinner." - Helen Keller, on learning of the death of her grandfather email: aripee at inanna . com >This post isn't about dentistry. But it is about how dentistry is being >discussed in usenet. Would any of our old-regulars (no age mentioned) >or new-arrivals (no age mentioned) care to discuss the value of this >particular global forum to the profession of dentistry and to the >patients (whom are also dental professionals when necessary)? It's just >an idea of mine. What do "you all" (y'all) think? I generally just lurk because I am a consumer of dentistry, not a practitioner. I have received some good information here which has made it easier to understand why my dentist does some things one way and doesn't do some things at all. Also, because of my interest in medical quackery, I have found this a useful forum to see professional reaction and response to the idiocies of the anti-amalgam and anti-fluoride performers. SignaturePeter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com I have lurking around sci.med.dentistry for some time.... in fact, since my days from dental school back in 1995! So it's been around for a while! Thanks for the company! |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.