Profiles and Credibilty

[Fraser.g]

I do not hate Quick Clot it is a tool. A tool that was still being evaluated and was not approved for use. Yes it was I that posted the cautionary because untrained people were grabbing it of the shelf thinking that they coulduse the product.

In the right situation, it will stop bleeding. If used incorrectly it can cause more damage than good.

I know who I am, I know who AM is. We still don't know who you are or from what POV you are comming from.

Reg?
Res?
Combat Arms?
Medic?
retired?
Civi Medic?
Fire?
Wanna Be?

We don't know

 

[JANES]

Sounds like a personal problems. 

Thats not just the plan, that is the current sit.

It's also funny how attitudes change as things become widely accepted.  "All truth passes through three stages: First it is ridiculed, Second it is violently opposed, Third it is accepted as being self-evident." Arthur Schopenhauer, German philosopher, (1788-1860)

 

[combat_medic]

Janes,

Tread carefully. You are making a lot of offensive remarks to some very experienced soldiers. I would recommend you watch your tone and fill out your profile or you will be introduced to the warning system.

Welcome to army.ca

combat_medic
Staff

 

[JANES]

Janes,

Tread carefully. You are making a lot of offensive remarks to some very experienced soldiers. I would recommend you watch your tone and fill out your profile or you will be introduced to the warning system.

Welcome to army.ca

You know, I dont take kindly to threats.  I simply say things the way I see them.  I also provide a lot of good information that some people must feel threatened by.  I assure you, I don't make anything up and only post facts.  As for my blank profile, I believe it keeps people honest.  It prevents bullying and brown nosing.  Regardless if I'm a 12 year old kid or a trauma surgeon, you can take my posts or leave them.  If you are so inclined, I hope at least they generate interest and discussion and make people go research the topics.  If I challenge people, then it is probably because I have info to the contrary of their statments, regardless of their credentials.  I will say it again, I do not make anything up.  I think it's important for people to be humble, and when people make statements that are out of their relm, I will call them on it.  I dont care if you are a doctor and you've been to Bosnia, that doesn't mean that you are a TCCC expert.  I don't claim to be anything.  For all I care, please consider me the 12 year old child that is a wanna be.  The fact remains that I only post facts and it is quality information if you are so inclined to look past your ego.  If people feel threatened by a blank profile, then that is not my problem.  By turning me off of this forum, you will loose a valuable information asset.  So for now, I will sit back and watch from a distance.  Good bye!

 

[old medic]

You know, I dont take kindly to threats.  I simply say things the way I see them.  ....    Good bye!

Welcome to the warning system.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

The fact remains that I only post facts and it is quality information if you are so inclined to look past your ego.  If people feel threatened by a blank profile, then that is not my problem.  By turning me off of this forum, you will loose a valuable information asset.  So for now, I will sit back and watch from a distance.  Good bye!

See, now here's the problem. I'm a babe in the woods when your talking about this stuff in here. So to see what side I'd lean to, I would look at a person's competence and experience. Here, that's done with a profile. The other way to make me take your side would be to quote your sources and/ or research. You've provided neither. You talk a good talk, but you stumble with your walk.

And speaking of inflated egos........stay away from sharp objects.

 

[kj_gully]

Looks to me like you've pissed off one of the best posters in here, a person using this site specifically for what it was designed for, to generate debate, and as an anonymous way of questioning accepted norms. The site will be less if all POV are not welcomed, and everyone should be able to take a little when they dish it. Anonymity is a right often exercised in forums like this, and remember @ least JANES has been honest enough to leave his/hers blank, as opposed to saying he is the CO of 4123 Water Buffalo battalion Armoured fusiliers, which he/she easily could do.

 

[combat_medic]

If you think Janes is the best poster here, then you really haven't been here very long.

There's nothing wrong with protecting one's anonymity, but to be spouting off about what the CF should and should not be doing operationally, or in training, and not being able to back ANYTHING up, is extremely dangerous. If he is just some punk kid, or even a 50 year old without so much as basic first aid, then yeah, he really has very little clout with which to be talking about medical policies, here or anywhere. Giving advice and opinions on medical topics, in particular, is extremely dangerous if you don't know what you're talking about. Particularly when people come on here and can't tell the difference between those with experience and those without and end up doing a lot of damage.

His POV is welcome, but until he backs it up with credentials, it's pretty worthless. He also lipped off a staff member after already being warned several times. He (and you) were made aware of the forum rules when you signed up. You abide by them, or you're gone. It's that simple.

We're here to defend democracy, people, not practice it.

 

[George Wallace]

In some circles, the lack of credentials will automatically disqualify you.

 

[Journeyman]

I agree that JANES has contributed some of the more useful discussion points here. While he is doing an admirable job overcoming his crippling shyness   ......maybe I was concentrating on the substantive content of his posts, rather than judging any attendant degree of ego or self-esteem.

For that reason, I also find listing his current load-station in his profile irrelevant as well. For some discussion points on this site, it's nice to know people's background. Here, with the discussion focused upon evolving protocols for reasonably unchanging A&P problems.....well, the informed content of his posts have persuaded me of his competency to provide insights. I don't believe him to be armyboi or silverbach reincarnate.

Was the warning based upon a complaint from someone whose feelings he had hurt, or was it administered pre-emptively, as prophylaxis? I believe this warning served only to stifle discussion. While I may have been rude once or twice in my military career, or been on the receiving end of someone's ego, no one died.

At the risk of apprearing over-dramatic, I'd hate to think troops may suffer because potentially life-saving discussion was quashed because opinions were expressed without adequate politeness.

 

[kj_gully]

after reading the technical content of some posts, and it is easy to see  if someone knows what they are talking about. I think, after "duelling" with Janes on a couple threads, that he is VERY qualified in pre hospital medicine. Look around the site, and try to disagree.

 

[old medic]

Ref: Credentials

This is nothing new, they are asked for consistently at army.ca on each board. Whenever someone comments
on equipment purchases, vehicles, weapons, etc., they are asked for credentials and their experience or to stay in their
lane.

When one discusses the art of medicine or discusses medical procedures with other medical professionals then one's
experience and credentials are (and should be) examined. 

 

[Armymedic]

Old Medic, can we remove this JANES content from an otherwise good thread in to a new thread with his name as the title?

The last good post was mine about Quickclot.

 

[Journeyman]

The last good post was mine about Quickclot.

Well, at least we sorted out that ego issue

 

[Armymedic]

Ha....

Nowhere do I ever say I am humble.

 

[old medic]

This thread is split from, and initially contains replies too this message:
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/23593/post-347086.html#msg347086

 

[George Wallace]

I'm sorry, but this is not the place for egos.

As I said in this Topic already, sometimes the lack of credentials will disqualify you from a discussion.  If Janes is someone like me, without any formal Medical Training, who has however taken an interest in Medicine and done a lot of research at the Library, but nothing clinical, and can 'Talk the Talk, but hasn't Walked the Walk", they can be a very dangerous person.  Especially in fields like Medicine, where lives may be on the line, a person may be able to influence someone, who doesn't know their background, into making a fatal error.  The last thing I would want to have happen to me if I were being treated for injuries, is to have a Professional give me treatment on the advice of an adviser who has not produced any credible credentials.  These discussions do involve "Life and Death", and without any credentials, how can we take the source of Janes comments without doubt and skepticism?  Would you accept my input to the discussion of Medical Procedures just as readily?  I would hope not.

Janes to me is a Publication of AFV information.  Not always exact in their facts, but used by most militaries to identify Weapons Systems and Equipment of Foreign Militaries.  To me, Janes logon therefore equates as a person who does a lot of "READING" of Journals, Publications, Open Source materials, etc.  Does Janes have any real experience in the Medical Profession other than that is very questionable.

 

[muskrat89]

At the risk of apprearing over-dramatic, I'd hate to think troops may suffer because potentially life-saving discussion was quashed because opinions were expressed without adequate politeness.

I think if someone is developing medical protocols based on internet discussions, then there are bigger problems at hand than whether a (relatively minor) warning was administered justifiably.

Look, journeyman - I have no dog in this hunt, and the extent of my medical knowledge is "needles are pointy". That being said, I think the posters most slighted are the ones in the profession, perhaps because you are best equipped to sort the wheat from the chaff. That being said, other people read these forums - civilians, retirees, potential recruits, etc.

If there were ongoing discussions "out of your lanes", but regarding subjects of interest - maybe you would see it differently. If someone was handing out detailed legal advice, with no credentials, it wouldn't make you uncomfortable? How about if the poster became obstinate, when the lack of credentials was questioned? The Mods see this much more frequently in the equipment forums. (Usually) young posters that are well-read will often spout technical data that sounds factual, but at the end of the day - is inaccurate.

I think because this medical stuff is much more important than whether the "Bolivian 10.6 mm auto handcannon fires at a rate or 300 rpm or 463 rpm".. that credentials are even more important.

Full profiles are indeed optional here, but that often is at the expense of credibility.

 

[2 Cdo]

Profiles and credibility? Right, I think I will change my profile to show myself as the VCDS and post a couple of thousand posts so that I can now be taken seriously by the "old timers" on this site! : A profile can be made to say anything and number of posts does not make you an expert!

Old Medic, can we remove this JANES content from an otherwise good thread in to a new thread with his name as the title?

Yes, by all means lets remove anything that I don't agree/like! : Self importance of some on this site is astounding!

 

[DG-41]

If you claim that you are the VCDS, that is easily checked.

Whereas a blank profile cannot be verified.

As far as I'm concerned, a blank profile is an admission of inexperience.

DG