Uhh okay Anthony that is just freaky. What ever it is.. I hope you get it all sorted out okay. .....

bec

Whatever it is . . . I really appreciate your looking out for us, Anthony. Thanks.

Hodge

Ok, I have processed the long list of private requests tonight for both PTSD and Carer, though only very few met my criteria for entry. Those who where rejected, it does not mean you should run away or feel rejected, its not about a judgement against you, but about how I perceive your posting history and content. Very few process each time. All you have to do is keep posting and reapply at a later date for reassessment.

I am quite stringent on access to private data and have only processed tonight because some resolution in other areas has been obtained.

Please note: all private access will require a reauthorisation process at some date after discussion with private and public members to help determine an appropriate security process for authenticity and access requirement verification.

Anthony,

Does this affect our trauma diaries at all? Will everything be wiped out when you do the security update?

nor

Nothing will be removed.... only access will change. Some may have to request their diary moved if they do not meet enhanced security measures.

It was simple and easy to read each person long ago and determine legitimacy of the person. Now though, with near 500 active members and more registering daily, it is becoming a lot harder to read each person and determine whether they are legitimate or just trying to get access to something they don't have.

End of the day.... the privacy of all those who have access and have posted private matters about themselves away from the public are at risk I feel if I do not implement a more stringent application process. It will need to incorporate written and documented aspects of each member, something like a written application with supporting documents sent to me, with further followup procedures to verify personal details. I may even incorporate the requirement off an actual written diagnosis with the physicians contact details for formal verification. I am not sure yet, but security needs to be enhanced before something does go wrong.

When I first joined and learned of the "moderated member" idea, I thought it was a bit strict, simply because I'd never seen it before. Then I quickly realized that for our privacy and safety, it is a good thing. My husband (who usually hates rules of any kind, lol) actually said something like "I am glad they have that. It shows they are serious about who can come in there." I commend the effort to keep things safe and private here!

I would add however that I think requiring a doctor's verification is going a little too far. I have learned all my life never to send personal information to people I know from the Internet. I think a written diagnosis or doctor's contact details falls under that category. If not for his videos, Anthony could be a purple giraffe for all we know. :p Do we get any verification back that the folks who run this forum are for real?

Good point, Lucky Laser...it is not safe for any of us to be sending private information like that to any website.

My concern is that Anthony might get a subpoena for this information... right now I can't think of a situation where this would happen, but then again I've seen lots of wacky stuff that I never would have expected.

Thanks.... yes, I do agree that measures can be harsh, though if I did move to such a thing for the private area access, not the normal get out of moderation type stuff, there would be a formal and legal agreement which I would have to agree with for privacy concerns.

Moderation for new members stops a lot of issues coming into the forum to begin with. It stops 99% of trolls, 99.9% of spammers, it finds 99% of predators, etc. It has a good success rate of weeding out those who are here legitimately to those who go from forum to forum, community to community looking to cause trouble. It works, its proven. Forum manufacturers build such systems into the forum for these exact reasons, because they receive the feedback from all forum owners who have the same problems. This is how such systems come to light in the first place, through the owners reporting back to the software manufacturers. Get enough reports from thousands of owners, a problem exists that software can fix easily.

I may move to what some use to verify online, in that you must send certified true copies of three identification forms, ie. license, bank card, utilities notice, something that verifies yourself and your location. That is quite normal to do across the Internet, though obviously companies who use it also have a standing privacy document outlining the use, filing and destruction of such personal information.

Anonymity is fine as a member of this forum... though when you talk about having access to specialised areas of the forum that are not public and contain very personal information that people put there for a good reason, privacy from spouses, loved one's, friends, co-workers, etc.... that information must be protected by strict application and anonymity goes out the door in relation to member - myself.

Currently it is strict once entered, in that by having access you automatically agree to not copy, transcribe, replicate or remove any content from such areas. Doing so will see a person in legal matters, regardless their location in the world. Privacy here is an issue, and it is the issue that is important because they are private areas for the security and safety of those members. It is free, not paid, but privacy must still be adhered.

Thanks for fleshing that out Anthony. I tend to be one of those people who is afraid of sending any information to anything that isn't as well-known as Amazon. Even though I understand the reasons for it (and I figured you just meant the private access), it still makes my stomach knot a little. Internet security has always been a topic of interest for me. :)