MT

Google

Forum Decorum

On Manipulation and Fair Influence / Back to Forum Decorum / Back to Free Stuff

3/8/97, from Mary: I appreciate your concern about the risk of openness online, and I believe privacy is very important. I've suffered some loss for trusting MTs online, but much greater good. I know that the only way networking can happen is for people to risk and trust. I think it is a reasonable risk to be known online, much the same as newspapers and magazines, but it is probably only wise if you are willing to give as well as receive. If we want others to receive from us, I think we have to be known to be trusted. Online communication is facilitated by self-disclosure. I trust those who are open more than those who hide. Hopefully we can keep the network from becoming a cobweb!


3/8/97, from Mary: 1. On the limits of computer communication: We converse here with written words and emoticons only, and experts say that words are about 3% of normal human communication when we are physically present, because 97% is nonverbal--the reassuring smile, the nervous or timid tone of voice, the body posture that shows we are insecure or depressed, the twinkle in the eye that shows we don't take ourselves to seriously, etc.--all of which help us understand each other. Most of us have never seen or heard each other.

2. On the limits of emotional venting: Many of us work alone and our work is often relentless hours of drugery, even if we are paid well. Some of us use this public forum to vent our frustrations to others who can empathize. When frustrated and angry, we don't carefully edit our words, we just say how we feel, even using stereotypes as targets sometimes. It can appear as reverse snobbery, since we are low on the status levels of medical professions and are usually complaining about those who are "over" us in some way. I don't agree that dumping feelings gives us the moral right to say anything we please, but I do think a case can be made for not taking people literally when they are expressing strong negative feelings, but taking their feelings seriously. We all have our temporary insanities...

3. On the limits of forum facilitating: There are quite a few of us here who like to help create order, to mark trails in this wilderness so others can find their way more easily. When people vent, we want to listen and help. We want to make people who are afraid of conflict or of being known here feel comfortable enough to participate and express themselves. But none of us can control each other, and none of us can escape the risk of public embarrassment. We do recover...

I hope those reading this who have formed strong opinions against us will reconsider. Withhold judgment until you learn more about who we are, past the surface of one or two posts. If you do not feel free to post publicly, try responding to a post via email. I like to think of a public message board as a main artery, email as the smaller veins...to life!


2/23/97, from Mary, from note to NMTC Listserv

1. This listserv is being posted on the web now and nothing can be deleted. It is no longer "just" an email group list to 100+ MTs. It's best to think of a post here like a newspaper article.

2. Private email is the best way to handle sensitive questions, but even that is not private, as it is legally the property of your server who must provide it to courts if required.

3. Phone calls are another way to handle personal matters, but even that is not private, as people can record calls.

4. If we really take the above three seriously, we won't get much done!

5. Internet communication is opening up all kinds of new and accelerated information flow, including personal information. It's messy and there are lawsuits, but it's also holding us all more accountable. Companies are learning they can't stop it, and they are beginning to see the importance of ONLINE REPRESENTATIVES to make them immediately available to people who are online. I've seen people and businesses hurt by online talk, but I've seen even more good done, especially in holding people responsible. No one is perfect; the real division is between those who listen and do something about concerns and those who aren't even there to hear and just resist when they do hear.

5. Privacy is still possible, and trust is based on shared confidences between people. Privacy is a basic right of free people, and necessary to be healthy persons. Email is relatively private, and so are phone conversations. This listserv is a platform in front of the whole world, but it doesn't feel like it because I'm here all alone typing this.


2/23/97, from Mary

The three largest MT companies have been criticized a lot online, and I warn people about them too because I have heard reports about poor treatment of MTs and sometimes low pay.

But I just talked to someone yesterday working for TL out of Ohio; we discussed pay in detail and I was pleased to find that she was paid very fairly from what I know of different companies, taking into account benefits. This is the first time I've heard of TL paying decently. I've heard that Edix has recently raised their rates, but they are in an equipment transition and still working out the bugs. I get the feeling that MRC has employees in offices and those MTs aren't online, but I could be wrong.

I think everyone of these companies needs an online representative who could post information here and answer questions that arise, correct misinformation and establish their credibility in cyberspace. If anyone is reading this who works for MRC, TL, or Edix, you could do your company a service to gives us current information, if you dare. It would be even better if you could get them to appoint you as an "official" online representative who can communicate back and forth, in the interest of MTs AND in the interest of the company. I don't think most online MTs are expecting companies to be perfect; we just expect to be heard and responded to, and we will be, because we are no longer isolated, and we each have the power to publish.


2/97, from Mary

We have been hearing reports about some MT companies and schools treating people poorly. It seems to me that MTs should be treated as customers, and we should treat everyone as a customer or potential customer, even when we are rushed. Even when others treat us poorly, basic respect can lift the level of discussion, even when we are disagreeing strongly. Companies and schools with strong points can lose us easily on this one thing, how we are treated and spoken to. I don't think it is necessarily because we are too sensitive, but because we know that it indicates something deeper that could make a working relationship oppressive. Working at home does protect us a great deal from office tensions, but it also leaves us alone to brood all day about mistreatment from one phone call or note. Poor pay is only part of the sweatshop mentality; the other is the way we treat each other. And first impressions on the phone and the few words we are known by online are often all we know of each other and establish our reputation.

This becomes even more important when dealing with the international audience online. Dealing with people from different cultures takes even greater tact, allowing for easy misunderstandings. Courtesy becomes a bridge and a protection. Without it, no real exchange may happen, only retreat.

As MTs, we have limited choices, but we do have choices, and hopefully this will help those who need our services to treat us like customers.


8/18/96, from Kathy Cameron, kcameron@ainet.com:

I'm not speaking for AAMT here, because I don't know their legal issues or whatever. But, you know, having experienced an interesting situation with another MT list, I now do see that it is hard for on-line people to know when a person is speaking from a personal point of view only or on behalf of an organization. Therein lies a problem. I submitted a personal opinion and so stated; but, others who know me and my employer (I did not identify the employer in the post), associated my opinion with my employer and brought the employer's name into the thread. For this reason, I now find it difficult to participate in lists and newsgroups from a personal side, but always must prepare my message knowing that it may be associated with my employer, whether I want it to be or not. Just some thoughts, and personal ones at that. ;-) See my dilemma?

8/18/96, From Mary:
I understand your dilemma, but it's one we all have I think to different degrees. We are all connected with different companies, hospitals, doctors, cities, other groups, software likes, book preferences, web sites, friends and families.

Here's what I think. Some things you can keep private, some things you can't. I think you are too well known to keep your associations private. Your reputation is connected to HPI, and you are known as an Expert Teacher. HPI can be proud to be benefiting from your reputation! :)

My connection with Signal is something I chose to make public, with their permission. We worked out an understanding of what I was free to do and say as my own person by trial and error somewhat. We realized I would always be connected with them, though I'm only just one of their MTs. We value freedom of speech so much we sometimes forget that it's not always wise to use all the room given; our role and our purposes define what liberties we choose to take, what liberties we choose to restrain voluntarily or completely sacrifice, in what feels like a voluntary poverty (or like turning the other cheek), for good purposes.

I posted a summary of a business ethic on forum decorum on MT Daily II at http://angelfire.com/mt2/forums.html that was taken from a large company that was dealing with this. They suggested all disclaimers are counterproductive, and asked their people to use discretion and to consider their posts on public lists or forums something that they would be willing to see in the newspaper the next morning.

While we don't have rules here or an owner like the KAMT list does, I doubt you will be flamed here, as the law of reason and the milk of human kindness are a part of most of the good people on this forum. I honor you, as one of the gifts to our community. You're an asset to HPI!


7/96, from Gail Hall, EZ steps to starting a flame war:
1. Post to the group and announce to the world that you are the greatest and the smartest one in your part of the world.
2. Accuse the members of the group of being dolts, stupid, unhelpful, blah, blah. Use terms like "pseudo-MTs" to emphasize your opinion of those who post basic questions that any MT would KNOW.
3. Take any remarks personally, especially any criticism or differing opinions, and then blast back at the whole group in response to what one or two people say. I suppose there are more steps, but this is a good start.
7/96, from Mary Morken, Conflict resolution on forums:
After four years on forums, I still do not know the best way to process conflicts with a group on a public forum, even if there was a moderator. It seems that any response to inflammatory or strongly emotional notes just adds fuel to the fire, even if it is a lecture about what ought to be corrected, or a denial that there is any conflict. The angry take the stage and the rest of us hide, waiting out the fire storm. Forum participation wanes for a time, and slowly the timid crawl back out of the woodwork, if they haven't left altogether. And AAMT is again confirmed in its opinion that cyberspace is full of violence without police--anarcy.

The dilemma is there for us all: If we let rude comments remain on this forum without challenge, it reflects on our profession; if we publically scold someone, that also reflects on our profession. What to do? I don't know. We can't become a therapy group, and we can't control the responses to any post we write--we have to be ready for anything when we post. Here's what I've tried when I have a strong response to a note, with some benefit sometimes: I write persons email with my opinion, either support for the hurt ones or warning to the offender. I write friends from the forum email with questions about what is best strategy, conferring before acting, trying to understand where people are coming from. Mostly I wonder if we will ever learn to do this better!

I do think it helps to be very cool and rational with our own feelings, using all our emotional energy to empathize and understand the other persons and figure out what's going to help the group get back onto a problem-solving, creative and upbuilding direction.

Perhaps my own feeling of not knowing what to do is shared by many of us. I hope people will not leave the forum; on the other hand, I know some who have been on forums for 10 years, and back in the old days rudeness was considered entertaining and courageous. Also different parts of the country have different ways of defining rudeness. I do hope lurkers will come out of the woodwork and participate, risking the possible personal attack that you can never guarantee won't come. I do have hope that we will learn to do this better, if only by trial and error! So much good is here, it's worth the struggle.


7/96, Juanita Reames
I admire those of you who struggle and participate here. You are a lively group and I have great faith in you. I have watched the growth of this group with interest over the past couple of years and have been impressed with the teamwork I see emerging. I agree that there is so much good here, worth the struggle to make it a forum we can all be proud of.

I am willing to share in your struggle to the best of my ability. I may not post very often, but I follow the group on a regular basis and take notes on the good information you share. I also applaud your efforts to communicate so openly.

A technique I use when a topic is highly charged with emotion is to write out my response with plain old-fashioned paper and pen first. Then I go back over it to see if it says what I really want to say. I ask myself if it supports or undermines whatever trust I have established in the relationships involved. Yes, I do struggle with the words I choose to share with others. When misunderstandings arise, it takes a lot of energy sometimes to set things right.

In electronic forums, such as this, building strong teamwork presents new pitfalls. A healthy debate to one is a destructive attack to another. There are so many "unknown" people to consider. With the whole world as our audience, it gets a bit tricky, as we have seen. In the future, if I see that I have information you are seeking, I will share it with you. If I make mistakes along the way in using "cybercommunication," please know I will be persistent in making whatever corrections are necessary so we can get to know and trust each other. I, too, have hope that we will learn to do this better.


6/96, from Mary Morken, Business ethics for posting on public forums:
Through a family contact, I have obtained an example of what one large company is doing with their employees who are on the Internet. At first, everyone was complaining publically about the company and giving away company secrets inappropriately. Instead of pursuing punishing them (for libel or slander or personal use) or taking away their Internet access at work, this company decided to endure it and try to teach them the appropriate business ethics for this new and easy public freedom of speech. Rules for the new city square you could say. Just imagine if the Internet had been around in the 1960s! Haight Ashbury would have had a web site and a dozen forums! Just imagine what the Internet is doing for every political cause, world wide...but back to the subject.

Some of the principles simply had to do with protecting the interests of the company and the security of confidential information about the company -- the things that give the company an advantage that would benefit their competitors: "competition-sensitive information." The public relations department of the company was available to help people who might be pursued for interviews by news media, etc. Rumors were not to be passed along, but they could give their reaction to some publically known change in the company, but without speculating. The company had a web page that the employees could refer to when they had questions about what was public information or company-privileged information.

While they did not say a person could not identify their company (their email addresses gave it away), they did say that they should avoid the appearance of speaking on behalf of the company. Using a disclaimer and naming the company was discouraged, since this can be misperceived as just the opposite of the disclaimer and is not a legal protection. Public postings on the Internet were to be considered like a newspaper article. They did provide a procedure for special requests for clearance of information anyone wanted to use publically.

I've been online for four years with permission from my company to be known publically as working with them. It has been a learning process for both of us, and I am very grateful they have been willing to risk with me and learn from my mistakes! Go, Signal!


6/96, from Burt Danet:
The sensitive nature of these issues certainly gives fuel for thought. What is the objective in posting information in a public forum? Is it to vent? To take revenge? To make know a grievance? Is it to offer constructive criticism? Is it to help one another benefit from modes of operation and interaction between company managers and employees which create a productive working atmosphere? Is it to help improve communication all around so that in a more open atmosphere people are more likely to deal with what they are responding to, rather than ignore it, let it fester, or simply walk away from it?

The complexity of these issues will not easily be sorted out. But perhaps over time some guidelines for handling sensitive material can be established. The consequences and implications of one's public posts cannot be underestimated. The power of the communicating word (no longer spoken!) is available for multiple viewers' reactions. But the visual/written word has its pros and cons -- dealing as it were in a "pure" form of communication not hindered/enhanced by other cues, like verbal expression, tone, gestures, body movements, facial expressions and the like.

Can guidelines be established for appropriate, constructive communication? Can a wish list be created for methods of utilizing internet forums which will enhance and support rather than demean, negatively criticize or malign? Hopefully with the new information/internet age upon us we can come up with meaningful and helpful guidelines which will avoid any kind of "big brother" mentality and will bring us all into an improved world of mutual interaction on and off the net.


From Mary Morken:
Medical knowledge can lead some MTs to a kind of snobbery of MTs who are stronger in language skills than medical understanding. It would be interesting to run a test of some MTs from both groups and see who does better, those stronger in medical knowledge or those stronger in language skills.

I do think we can't get rid of the tension between high standards and treating each other with kindness; respect for high standards can appear to be rejection of those with low standards, and acceptance of MTs who are still in the first five years and without previous medical experience can look like compromising standards.

Maybe this is needed: "Quality AND Kindness Assurance Department".


From Mary:
This ancient tension between the old and the new surfaces on the MT forums every now and then...and it can really be painful. We tend to forget what a broad audience we have on here, assuming our "shop talk" is private.

The experts get frustrated with the beginners, the beginners get frustrated with the experts. Hope we can find some "virtual empathy" for each other on here without the advantage of nonverbal communication. I hope everyone from students to 30-year MTs will participate here, but a public forum is only good for certain things I think.

I think it's more likely that venting of strong personal feelings will get a supportive response when it is done more privately by e-mail or group e-mail to friends with similar perspectives. This forum is read by hundreds of people; I think of it like a microphone in front of an auditorium full of people. It takes a bit more strategic planning when you post on a forum knowing there are people who disagree, to keep this a healthy community, posting notes "for the good of the general welfare."

Having said that, I want to tell you (written to a new MT) I respect the work you are doing! I hope you will hang in here with us while we all learn how to "get along" in this new way of talking to each other.


From Julie Veronick:
When I worked at a hospital, I knew a lady who had been transcribing for 20 years (at least that what she called it!) and I believe a slug could have produced better reports than she did. She never looked anything up, always typed the first thing she heard (even if it didn't fit with the context of the report), and generally loused up any report she touched. She was an embarrassment to the department to say the least.

On the other hand, I have taught many people who were new to transcription and found they caught on amazingly fast and had a wonderful aptitude for transcription. They could have taught the 20-year veteran a thing or two (or 200).


MT Daily Homepage