War had broken out between a poster with the idiotic name of The Salted Slug and Dr X . War commenced on Bad Science's forum which is a awful place filled with those who clearly have nothing better to do than debate silly issues that are irrelevant to life in general. It is though a place of intellectuals who do just that - intellectualize.
The owner of this forum is the great Dr Ben Goldacre, a doctor with more enemies than me. Never known anyone sued so many times for libel.
Anyhow, The Salted Slug and colleagues were mean enough to disclose the identity of Dr X with some choice libelous words. I approached Ben Goldacre who I have always had a great deal of respect for. Ben though failed miserably to listen to logic or rationality opting instead to be a stubborn old goat. He was indeed a tough nut to crack.
I assisted Dr X in his defences against Dr Goldacre who continued a two hour pointless conversation with us. The issue should have taken one minute to resolve. Dr Goldacre though pointed out that there was no reason he should protect Dr X's identity given it was disclosed on a different website. I pointed out Ben's obligations under the Data Protection Act 1998. Ben refused to respond. I then pointed out that the matter online was tantamount to cyberharassment. I suspect Ben thought I was kidding and requested all the case law on the subject. So all the case law was sent in about 3 minutes. Again, he had no response to this. I then pulled the case law for discovering the identity of an anonymous posters. In the meantime, Dr X had written a fantastic email to The Salted Slug and offered to see Dr Goldacre in court. I offered to develop the pre-action protocol for Dr X.
A few seconds later, the entire lot of boys [ and we should call them boys as opposed to men] collapsed and pulled the entire thread of discussion.
Dr X and I have always worked extremely well as a team since 2003. We won but it left a bitter taste in my mouth. I didn't expect this bizarre behaviour from Ben Goldacre who showed me that he was reckeless in his understanding of libel law. Indeed, he didn't know much about it. He was uneducated in his knowledge of cyberharassment and prompted to proceed to make decisions without aquainting himself with the detail. The worst issue was the reckless nature when it came to the Data Protection Act 1998. Ben was also unsympathetic regarding the risks posed by the General Medical Council. This is what shocked me completely.
I had hoped Ben was unlike many others. He spends his days telling us all how we should be accurate in our dealings, that accuracy in science is important. Ben though cares nothing for case law, the law or accuracy in these matters. If we placed legalities aside, I thought he would care a little for the fact that we were all colleagues. If he had requested that I removed something that was risky for him, I would have obliged. I felt this was the wrong case to play hard ball with us especially when I had supported him to the hilt in his many battles.
Indeed, it was destructive because it has alienated his colleagues. I ended with a few things - firstly I hoped we would never have the pleasure of dealing with each other again. Secondly, should he find himself subjected to a GMC investigation, then we would just get the popcorn out and watch him - much like he watches the rest of his colleagues go down without batting an eyelid. And it is very sad to view doctors who have no empathy or sympathy for their colleagues at all. Ben's dealings with both Dr X and I were much like a broken record, he was too busy to read about what we were saying to him, his responses consisted of half baked logic and he was being unreasonable and stubborn. Ben appeared to be a very distracted man who clearly was reluctant and point blank refused to budge. The more the conversation progressed, the more he dug his heels in. While I accept this to be the manner to deal with authorities, I don't think this heavy handed approach worked with us. In any case, the collapse and removal of the entire thread proved that none of them had a leg to stand on in the first place.
They always say Great Expectations are bound to fall when some people are put to the test. Ben showed his true colours - a total disrespect for his colleagues, an inability to deal with matters reasonably and a failure to act with speed until he was threatened with court by Dr X. At the end, Ben whined about feeling threatened - having brought the entire issue upon himself in the first place. This post would never have been written had he just removed one post as requested a number of weeks ago. Anyhow, we all live and learn. The last time I had this kind of skirmish, it was with Raj Persaud. I told him in 2003 that he would one day be subjected to a GMC investigation and that he should not have a careless attitude to his colleagues who were unfortunate and unlucky enough to face the GMC. Persaud was indeed subjected to a GMC investigation and one that he has never recovered from. No one remains a golden boy forever especially if their arrogance makes them reckless.
No doubt, I shall be flamed on Bad Science's forums. That's fine - because that is what boys do. I was just wondering whether the boys on the Bad Science forums had better things to do like - tend to their wives, do the house work for their wives, be romantic to their girlfriends or boyfriends? Just a thought.....
The owner of this forum is the great Dr Ben Goldacre, a doctor with more enemies than me. Never known anyone sued so many times for libel.
Anyhow, The Salted Slug and colleagues were mean enough to disclose the identity of Dr X with some choice libelous words. I approached Ben Goldacre who I have always had a great deal of respect for. Ben though failed miserably to listen to logic or rationality opting instead to be a stubborn old goat. He was indeed a tough nut to crack.
I assisted Dr X in his defences against Dr Goldacre who continued a two hour pointless conversation with us. The issue should have taken one minute to resolve. Dr Goldacre though pointed out that there was no reason he should protect Dr X's identity given it was disclosed on a different website. I pointed out Ben's obligations under the Data Protection Act 1998. Ben refused to respond. I then pointed out that the matter online was tantamount to cyberharassment. I suspect Ben thought I was kidding and requested all the case law on the subject. So all the case law was sent in about 3 minutes. Again, he had no response to this. I then pulled the case law for discovering the identity of an anonymous posters. In the meantime, Dr X had written a fantastic email to The Salted Slug and offered to see Dr Goldacre in court. I offered to develop the pre-action protocol for Dr X.
A few seconds later, the entire lot of boys [ and we should call them boys as opposed to men] collapsed and pulled the entire thread of discussion.
Dr X and I have always worked extremely well as a team since 2003. We won but it left a bitter taste in my mouth. I didn't expect this bizarre behaviour from Ben Goldacre who showed me that he was reckeless in his understanding of libel law. Indeed, he didn't know much about it. He was uneducated in his knowledge of cyberharassment and prompted to proceed to make decisions without aquainting himself with the detail. The worst issue was the reckless nature when it came to the Data Protection Act 1998. Ben was also unsympathetic regarding the risks posed by the General Medical Council. This is what shocked me completely.
I had hoped Ben was unlike many others. He spends his days telling us all how we should be accurate in our dealings, that accuracy in science is important. Ben though cares nothing for case law, the law or accuracy in these matters. If we placed legalities aside, I thought he would care a little for the fact that we were all colleagues. If he had requested that I removed something that was risky for him, I would have obliged. I felt this was the wrong case to play hard ball with us especially when I had supported him to the hilt in his many battles.
Indeed, it was destructive because it has alienated his colleagues. I ended with a few things - firstly I hoped we would never have the pleasure of dealing with each other again. Secondly, should he find himself subjected to a GMC investigation, then we would just get the popcorn out and watch him - much like he watches the rest of his colleagues go down without batting an eyelid. And it is very sad to view doctors who have no empathy or sympathy for their colleagues at all. Ben's dealings with both Dr X and I were much like a broken record, he was too busy to read about what we were saying to him, his responses consisted of half baked logic and he was being unreasonable and stubborn. Ben appeared to be a very distracted man who clearly was reluctant and point blank refused to budge. The more the conversation progressed, the more he dug his heels in. While I accept this to be the manner to deal with authorities, I don't think this heavy handed approach worked with us. In any case, the collapse and removal of the entire thread proved that none of them had a leg to stand on in the first place.
They always say Great Expectations are bound to fall when some people are put to the test. Ben showed his true colours - a total disrespect for his colleagues, an inability to deal with matters reasonably and a failure to act with speed until he was threatened with court by Dr X. At the end, Ben whined about feeling threatened - having brought the entire issue upon himself in the first place. This post would never have been written had he just removed one post as requested a number of weeks ago. Anyhow, we all live and learn. The last time I had this kind of skirmish, it was with Raj Persaud. I told him in 2003 that he would one day be subjected to a GMC investigation and that he should not have a careless attitude to his colleagues who were unfortunate and unlucky enough to face the GMC. Persaud was indeed subjected to a GMC investigation and one that he has never recovered from. No one remains a golden boy forever especially if their arrogance makes them reckless.
No doubt, I shall be flamed on Bad Science's forums. That's fine - because that is what boys do. I was just wondering whether the boys on the Bad Science forums had better things to do like - tend to their wives, do the house work for their wives, be romantic to their girlfriends or boyfriends? Just a thought.....
2 comments:
What a knob!
Can I say that, or will I be sued?
Post a Comment