Agreed. Unless the moderator starts deleting threads, or altering someone's posts, they should be entitled to hold their own opinions. Being made a moderator does not mean you lose the right to express an opinion.
Graham http://www.synapsedirect.com/ Synapse - the EMR for smart users
I don't know what qualifications you think you need.
Just download a few EMRs and go for it. With time your reviews will improve. Don't understand how something works? Give their tech support team a workout!
Robert Gleeman: It's too hard to try EMRs. That's obvious.
It's too hard to try EMRs. That's obvious.
Sounds like EMRs are headed back to the days when you had to have a mechanic ride in your car with you. Although, "easy to use is easy to say", it really doesn't have to be that complex.
Fritz
fswitz: Robert Gleeman: It's too hard to try EMRs. That's obvious. Sounds like EMRs are headed back to the days when you had to have a mechanic ride in your car with you. Although, "easy to use is easy to say", it really doesn't have to be that complex. Fritz
Although the EMR marketplace lags the rest of the software industry in terms of functionality, ease of deployment, and reliability - things are changing. It's impossible for the Last Gen EMRs to survive without improving and slashing their prices. There are just too many options out there for the smaller doctor office. Unfortunately, there aren't many choices for the "Over 5 doctors" groups. eCW was the first wave of companies that spanked the Old Guard. There will be others.
Fear Not Fritz. It's the practical, small office EMRs, as yours, that will change the game.
gchiu: Agreed. Unless the moderator starts deleting threads, or altering someone's posts, they should be entitled to hold their own opinions. Being made a moderator does not mean you lose the right to express an opinion.
Graham,
I agree as well. Under free speech, Murdoch is welcome to post anything he wants with any opinion he wants - but that doesn't mean that his speech is free from comment or reproach. For instance in this thread, Murdoch has been trumpeting the AMA article concerning a Dr. Hendrix as another example of the difficulty of implementing NextGen. Did anyone (including and particulary Murdoch) bother to read the article in full? The physician in question bought and had the software implemented through a reseller. NextGen was not involved with the implementation. In addition, we offered more than once - as detailed in the article - to take him on directly to try and help him with his issues and he never followed through on the procees with us. I am not saying Dr. Hendrix did not have real issues - in fact I talked with him myself several times - but this particular instance seems to me to hardly be a "smoking gun". Now we can open another thread and discuss a vendors responsibility in "policing" their reseller channel, but the fact remains that resellers are independent businesses and when a physician signs a contract with one of our resellers, we have no participation in, nor control of the installation. Further as I have noted before, NextGen is now bringing live an average of one new practice every business day. If there were huge problems with our installs, one wouldn't have to work so hard to find negative examples.
That doesn't mean we haven't had installs where there have problems, every vendor has had failed installs. Sometimes it's our fault, sometimes it is the practices, most times it is a combination and/or the application is a bad fit for that particular practice. I have posted ad nauseum that our software - like all applications - is not the correct solution for all practices. What seems to escape proponents of the big EMR conspiricy theory is that when a mistake is made and we are selected for a practice for which our software is illsuited (sorry about the phrasing but the TV is on in the background with a Shakespeare comedy running) it is not a good thing for us. We make money by selling software. When there is a problem with an installation, we have to expend engergies and resources for which we do not receive addition money. In other words our profit goes down - to say nothing of the fact that problem installs make it harder for us to sell additional sites. It does us no good to "fool" someone into buying our software. It is counterproduction and stupid.
Sorry about the detour and back to your comment on moderators and crossing the line between fair comment and bias. I offer a link to a thread which in many respects is the source of my issues with the esteemed Dr. Murdoch. The site received a spam hit from an internet job site looking for a "NextGen consultant" and Nick asked Dr. Murdoch to check it out. Murdoch came to the conclusion that NextGen was spamming the site and posted his "findings" with his usual restraint and demanded an apology. In my reply I posted that we were not associated with the spamming and requested an apology back. Nick investigated with his usual fairness and determined that we were not associated with the spamming, posted an apology and actually went back and altered Murdoch's original post to remove the reference to us. Murdoch seemingly unwilling to accept that we were not at fault, despite clear evidence to contrary, persisted. When I once again protested and asked him to go back and read my original post, Murdoch finally got the picture. Then in what I believe is a clear example of both his bias and abuse of his moderator postition, immediately declared the whole thread as a waste of time and moved the post off the main forum. The sequence goes I believe, Dr. Murdoch was asked to check something out about NextGen by Nick, jumped to a conclusion that confirmed his bias and posted something completely wrong. Then when it was pointed out to him, not only by me but by Nick that he was wrong, he refused to accept that and continued to attack. Again it was pointed out that he was wrong and finally he got it. Then when it looked like a thread was going to be available that would openly demonstrate his bias, he immediatedly moved it where people would have to work hard to find it. It there is another interpretation of the thread, I am willing to listen. I considered making a formal protest and Nick and I exchanged a couple of emails on the subject, but I decided that it was counterproductive to the board and honestly my participation on the board and that it made sense to let the subject drop. This last go around obviously has made me change my mind.
Look, I am a longtime supporter of this site and believe that it serves a valuable service to our industry. I don't attack other vendors because I believe it is counterproductive to the purposes of the board. That doesn't mean I can't and won't comment in the negative when I think it is appropriate, as in this case. If you want to ask tough questions about NextGen in a reasonable manner, I will answer all day long. But I won't sit still for someone who refuses to make a reasonable attempt to be fair and to be redundant, that a moderator would do that brings the unbiased tag line into question.
Opus
http://www.emrupdate.com/forums/thread/40579.aspx
I wouldn't be too worried .. Cyath's biases are there to balance Dr Murdoch's biases. It all equals out in the end.
To be human, is to be biased. I guess Dr Murdoch is still smelling the smoke from a few failed NG installs from last year. A 3rd degree burn never really heals.
I think some of this might be moderated somewhat if we had vendor specific boards here.
DrMurdoch:Fear Not Fritz. It's the practical, small office EMRs, as yours, that will change the game.
Dr.Murdoch, there you again with your biases.
gchiu: I wouldn't be too worried .. Cyath's biases are there to balance Dr Murdoch's biases. It all equals out in the end.To be human, is to be biased. I guess Dr Murdoch is still smelling the smoke from a few failed NG installs from last year. A 3rd degree burn never really heals.I think some of this might be moderated somewhat if we had vendor specific boards here.
I am not worried - the board has always treated me very fairly and as we have seen, I am capable of defending myself. I actually thought that Murdoch and I had sort of come to a truce this year and had even begun to exchange some reasonably friendly posts. I probably shouldn't have stomped on him so hard, but the moderator thing really bugs me - maybe that's my own "issue". But not to put too fine a point on it, Cyath is no longer a moderator because he felt since he had selected a system it was hard for him to be objective. As such, his biases don't "balance" Murdoch. Cyath also seldom if ever posts heresay (unless he making another futile attempt to be funny)and/or speculates on products that he hasn't actually reviewed. Lowell was the same when he was a moderator. Murdoch can post anything he wants and be as negative as he wants, as a poster on the board. The moderator thing lends authority to what are I believe are personnal opinions. My last thoughts on this. Enough already, peace.
I want the final word here ...
heresay is spelled hearsay.
gchiu: I want the final word here ...heresay is spelled hearsay.
As a last word freak, well...
As an English major I am deeply embarassed. You are correct sir!
Classic Brendon post.