<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: RateMDs.com budges a bit</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2006/12/ratemdscom-budges-bit.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2006/12/ratemdscom-budges-bit.html</link>
	<description>medical blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 07:50:13 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2006/12/ratemdscom-budges-bit.html/comment-page-1#comment-69425</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Dec 2006 22:51:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2006/12/ratemdscom-budges-a-bit.html#comment-69425</guid>
		<description>This website is scary. Out of curiosity I looked up my own family doctor, and found a nasty comment insulting her weight and calling her young children &quot;very ugly&quot;. I guess any old whack job can say whatever they want under the veil of anonymity. &lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;I red-flagged the comment to submit a request for review this afternoon, and I guess to their credit, the post is no longer on there. I don&#039;t know why they let it get past their initial &quot;vetting&quot; process to begin with though.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This website is scary. Out of curiosity I looked up my own family doctor, and found a nasty comment insulting her weight and calling her young children &#8220;very ugly&#8221;. I guess any old whack job can say whatever they want under the veil of anonymity. </p>
<p>I red-flagged the comment to submit a request for review this afternoon, and I guess to their credit, the post is no longer on there. I don&#8217;t know why they let it get past their initial &#8220;vetting&#8221; process to begin with though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2006/12/ratemdscom-budges-bit.html/comment-page-1#comment-69374</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2006 21:53:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2006/12/ratemdscom-budges-a-bit.html#comment-69374</guid>
		<description>The problem with information systems that allow anonymous, non-verifiable posts is that the quality of information in is poor; thus the output is equally worthless.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;I just got done shilling for myself, as well as some glowing comments for some friends.  And the craziest part is that none of us are MDs.  As long as there are no meaningful filters to creating absolute fiction and downright lies in such databases, we should hammer home this point by adding to the fiction and lies.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The problem with information systems that allow anonymous, non-verifiable posts is that the quality of information in is poor; thus the output is equally worthless.</p>
<p>I just got done shilling for myself, as well as some glowing comments for some friends.  And the craziest part is that none of us are MDs.  As long as there are no meaningful filters to creating absolute fiction and downright lies in such databases, we should hammer home this point by adding to the fiction and lies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gasman</title>
		<link>http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2006/12/ratemdscom-budges-bit.html/comment-page-1#comment-69371</link>
		<dc:creator>Gasman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2006 19:27:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2006/12/ratemdscom-budges-a-bit.html#comment-69371</guid>
		<description>It does become a bit of a one sided presentation.  The patient, if ever they were a patient of the doc, is permitted to make just about any allegation.  &lt;br/&gt;The doc, however, can offer little in rebuttal.  He may not ever have had contact with the purported patient, may not recognize the patient&#039;s pseudonym, and if they do know who is ripping them, do not have the freedom to discuss case specifics.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;I have my own web tormentor.  He can slander my name just this side of legally actionable, and I can offer little objective resistance on the BBS he is posting, or on any other site.  Only when the patient files suit does it effectively give blanket immunity from HIPAA constraints.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It does become a bit of a one sided presentation.  The patient, if ever they were a patient of the doc, is permitted to make just about any allegation.  <br />The doc, however, can offer little in rebuttal.  He may not ever have had contact with the purported patient, may not recognize the patient&#8217;s pseudonym, and if they do know who is ripping them, do not have the freedom to discuss case specifics.</p>
<p>I have my own web tormentor.  He can slander my name just this side of legally actionable, and I can offer little objective resistance on the BBS he is posting, or on any other site.  Only when the patient files suit does it effectively give blanket immunity from HIPAA constraints.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
