Ah, ha! Now we have gone to many new "ANONs" and the entire "Who is Glucerna" last posted on 13 hours ago has been deleted, including the post from Ruth as to metformin now tasting funny and "Lynn @ Glucerna"s reply about call the company with a whole string of phone numbers and when the office was open. Lynn@Glucerna replied 2 weeks ago that she was a consultant for Glucerna. Also the post 13 hours ago about how Web MD would probably be having a whole string of poster called (paraphrased) Bob@Bayer , Tess@Truetrack , etc. (I couldn't remember precisely.) If you search the name of some recent posters you can probably find some of those posts under history. It's good to know that WebMD has been bought.
Take the Poll
Intrigue and Ad - should paid representative from commercial diabetic groups be allowed to post as "members".
YES, they can be helpful, even if representig one viewpoint
NO, "ADs" is the top reason for reporting a post
Choice #2 got scrambled: the letters "&qout" were not in the original. The first thing listed to check in a report of a post was whether or not the reporter felt the post was an ad. If that is a reason for reporting a post according to WebMD, why does it then remove the whole thread, but let the other posts by Lynn@Glucerna remain? Also there is a mistake in typing by me, since it was Glucerna that was tasting funny according to the poster, not metformin. Cora, I have never posted as ANON before, but was peeved that Web MD removed a whole thread which questioned the allowing of a company consultant as a member of the support community. Many of the comments at the end of that thread had been posted by "ANONS". Other had their replys removed by Web MD.
Ya, I am finding the board here is going through one of it's "phases". I've been a member, through a variety of usernames due to technical problems, since the 90s. It seems to be a combo of the problems with the technical aspects and different levels of intervention from admins.
The good news is that things will calm down and go back to "normal", hopefully soon.
I am a moderator on another forum, and this sort of thing goes on quite often. We have been hit by spammers often trying to sell all sorts of things, but not by an actual person trying to win the trust of the community then hit it with a fishing link once in. This was quite subtle and intrusive on glucerna's part. I am probably going to be criticized, but my personal take was and is that this sort of invasion is just as unacceptable as a bot spammer.
Here's a few ideas that I do - if people don't want to reply to an "anon" then don't. If you have a problem that it is from an "anon" just don't respond. No one says you have to reply to an "anon".
If a person is bothered with a particular post or the original poster than don't reply. It is better not to leave a comment than a negative one.
Instead of "telling" a poster that they were just reported - just do it, we don't need to explain why or who reported it they should know the rules they joined didn't they? Who cares who reported it just as long as it is for the reasons stated by WebMD.
WebMD doesn't remove posts whenever they feel like it - it is when they feel it doesn't abide by their rules. Many times I felt like something should have been deleted but it wasn't so there must have been no rules broken.
I have been just leaving posts alone if I don't have nothing appropriate to say.
Deb, I think you misunderstood the Anon bit. I think people I recognized by their writing were writing in answer to my original post "Who is Glucerna" to protect their identify. The post which questioned whether an employee of the Glucerna Corp. was in fact violating the "No Ad" rules. MANY silent Reports were made buy myself and others who stated that they had sent in a report. Nothing happened except that the whole post was deleted including many replys by "Anons" who didn't wish to be identified, yet had a valid response. "Glucerna's" questionable answer to a poster, where she included company phone numbers and best time to call to get information about her product "Glucerna" so they could find out why Ruth thought it was tasting funny now, is above and beyond the usual personal health information exchanged here. Enough said.
You are encouraged to report negative side effects of prescription drugs to the FDA. Visit the FDA MedWatch website or call 1-800-FDA-1088.
The opinions expressed in WebMD Communities are solely those of the User, who may or may not have medical or scientific training. These opinions do not represent the opinions of WebMD. Communities are not reviewed by a WebMD physician or any member of the WebMD editorial staff for accuracy, balance, objectivity, or any other reason except for compliance with our Terms and Conditions. Some of these opinions may contain information about treatments or uses of drug products that have not been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. WebMD does not endorse any specific product, service or treatment.
Do not consider Communities as medical advice. Never delay or disregard seeking professional medical advice from your doctor or other qualified healthcare provider because of something you have read on WebMD. You should always speak with your doctor before you start, stop, or change any prescribed part of your care plan or treatment. WebMD understands that reading individual, real-life experiences can be a helpful resource, but it is never a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment from a qualified health care provider. If you think you may have a medical emergency, call your doctor or dial 911 immediately.