Re: Summary of responses
Donald E. Katz, C.O.
Description
Collection
Title:
Re: Summary of responses
Creator:
Donald E. Katz, C.O.
Date:
1/14/2000
Text:
With respect to individuals forwarding the summary of responses
received, I too agree with the comments that knowing the source of
the information may influence the perceived value of whatever is
conveyed. This is consistent with what is done in medical journals
or professional conferences, where the author or speaker in
question is required to disclose anything of value that may have
been received as related to the content of the paper or
presentation.
That said, I'd like to take this opportunity to encourage this practise
on the listserve. I say this because there have been several
instances where I've responded directly to the individual who posted
a question (as is requested and appropriate for this listserve), yet a
summary was never forwarded to the listserve for all to read. This
can be disappointing due to the fact that if I've personally taken the
time to respond, I'm equally interested in reading the responses
from others.
My $.02 on this subject.
-Don Katz, CO
Texas Scottish Rite Hospital for Children
Dallas, Texas
Date sent: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 10:14:24 -0800
Send reply to: Craig MacKenzie < <Email Address Redacted> >
From: Craig MacKenzie < <Email Address Redacted> >
Subject: Re: Summary of responses
To: <Email Address Redacted>
I agree, I think for practitioners to make educated decisions they need to
know the source of the information. So many times I have seen postings by
people who work for certain companies state the benefits of a product, but
they only post their name not the fact that they are actually employed by
that company.
Truly good information comes form practitioners who have tried several
products and can give unbiased information on the pro�s and con�s of that
product. Being an employee of TEC I know how our products work but it would
be unfair of me to compare our products with another companies without
letting the list know who I am, my credentials, and who I work for. With
that information you can truly weigh what is being said with the
circumstances under which it is said.
I personally believe that the lack of name, credentials, or company is
misleading the does not allow for the free flow of information and ideas.
Thank you for your time
Craig MacKenzie RTP(c)
Director of Research and development
TEC Interface Systems
On Fri, 14 Jan 2000 07:29:49 -0800, John Russell wrote:
> Hello
>
> I see that the trend of most people are posting summary of responses as
in
> the following list post.
>
> Here is the summary of responses I received to my post Gel
> Liners vs. Tec Interface.
> Bill Lifford, CP
>
> I simply don't read the summary of responses e-mail in this format.
Without
> knowing whom and from where the reply is coming from it means little to
me
> so why waste my time. The next point is if someone said something that I
> feel that is profound then, I don't know who that person is or how to
> contact that person.
> Just my thought
>
> John Russell Jr.
> Collier Rehabilitation System, Inc.
> 3161 Putnam Blvd.
> Pleasant Hill, CA. 94523
> V- 925-943-1119
> F- 925-943-2493
> E- <Email Address Redacted>
>
>
received, I too agree with the comments that knowing the source of
the information may influence the perceived value of whatever is
conveyed. This is consistent with what is done in medical journals
or professional conferences, where the author or speaker in
question is required to disclose anything of value that may have
been received as related to the content of the paper or
presentation.
That said, I'd like to take this opportunity to encourage this practise
on the listserve. I say this because there have been several
instances where I've responded directly to the individual who posted
a question (as is requested and appropriate for this listserve), yet a
summary was never forwarded to the listserve for all to read. This
can be disappointing due to the fact that if I've personally taken the
time to respond, I'm equally interested in reading the responses
from others.
My $.02 on this subject.
-Don Katz, CO
Texas Scottish Rite Hospital for Children
Dallas, Texas
Date sent: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 10:14:24 -0800
Send reply to: Craig MacKenzie < <Email Address Redacted> >
From: Craig MacKenzie < <Email Address Redacted> >
Subject: Re: Summary of responses
To: <Email Address Redacted>
I agree, I think for practitioners to make educated decisions they need to
know the source of the information. So many times I have seen postings by
people who work for certain companies state the benefits of a product, but
they only post their name not the fact that they are actually employed by
that company.
Truly good information comes form practitioners who have tried several
products and can give unbiased information on the pro�s and con�s of that
product. Being an employee of TEC I know how our products work but it would
be unfair of me to compare our products with another companies without
letting the list know who I am, my credentials, and who I work for. With
that information you can truly weigh what is being said with the
circumstances under which it is said.
I personally believe that the lack of name, credentials, or company is
misleading the does not allow for the free flow of information and ideas.
Thank you for your time
Craig MacKenzie RTP(c)
Director of Research and development
TEC Interface Systems
On Fri, 14 Jan 2000 07:29:49 -0800, John Russell wrote:
> Hello
>
> I see that the trend of most people are posting summary of responses as
in
> the following list post.
>
> Here is the summary of responses I received to my post Gel
> Liners vs. Tec Interface.
> Bill Lifford, CP
>
> I simply don't read the summary of responses e-mail in this format.
Without
> knowing whom and from where the reply is coming from it means little to
me
> so why waste my time. The next point is if someone said something that I
> feel that is profound then, I don't know who that person is or how to
> contact that person.
> Just my thought
>
> John Russell Jr.
> Collier Rehabilitation System, Inc.
> 3161 Putnam Blvd.
> Pleasant Hill, CA. 94523
> V- 925-943-1119
> F- 925-943-2493
> E- <Email Address Redacted>
>
>
Citation
Donald E. Katz, C.O., “Re: Summary of responses,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 2, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/213555.
