FOR ADMINISTRATION ONLY

The following is a reoccurring issue for many who post on this site. Now would be

a good time for clarity.

Therefore, I would like to request this thread be left strictly for

administration ONLY to reply initially.

Again, I am requesting that all members and forum readers please refrain from

posting a comment here until AFTER administration addresses this issue.

WILL ADMINISTRATION PLEASE EXPRESS TO EVERYONE, WHAT YOU WOULD NEED/LIKE/REQUEST

FROM A MEMBER WHO POSTS ON THIS SITE, IN ORDER TO ASSIST YOU IN BETTER CONFIRMING

OR VERIFYING THAT A PERSON IS WHO THEY ARE CLAIMING TO BE.

In other words, how can a poster prove, to your satisfaction, he/she is/was a

real patient? This will make it easier for real patients to make sure their posts

stay up on the site. For example, my physician profile has had over 40 reviews

taken down. These reviews were written by REAL, GENUINE patients, yet you will

not provide an option for them to verify this with you so that you put their

genuine review back up.

Let's get this issue solved once and for all.

Thank you..

I'm wondering if the

I'm wondering if the following link is enough to convince adminstration that they

continue to use and rely on a faulty algorithm which is removing many ratings

posted by REAL ACTUAL GENUINE patients of mine as well as many other physicians

on this site..

Please excuse the quality of editing..I did this all myself..I am a physician not

a video specialist.

EXAMPLE 1

**PLEASE NOTE THE COMMENT POSTED IN THIS lINK WAS TAGGED AND REMOVED AS SPAM

http://youtu.be/4eoT9u8weog

As you can see, this posting was not spam, nor was it a duplicate, coming from a previously posted origin/ip. Is this sufficient to convince you?

Again, I am requesting that all members and forum readers please refrain from

posting a comment here until AFTER administration addresses this issue.

.

.

rating reinstated

rating reinstated

RateMDsJohn wrote: rating

RateMDsJohn wrote:

rating reinstated

i dont see it john, can you please provide a link where i can see this rating reinstated.

Quote: For example, my

Quote:

For example, my physician profile has had over 40 reviews taken down.

Kiddoc,
You seem to think that your profile is representative of what the site's astroturf algorithm is doing. You seem to think that if you lost 40 ratings, then we must be removing ratings left, right and center across the site. This is not the case, not by a long shot.

I pulled together some numbers that show the overall impact of the algorithm.

Number of ratings received: 1,704,792
Number of ratings removed by the astroturf algorithm: 13,937
Number of physician profiles affected: 5,872
Number of physician profiles with more than 10 ratings removed by the algorithm: 135.

As you can see we are *not* removing ratings en masse. We are in fact very, very, selective about what gets removed.

Katherine

I'm not trying to enter a

I'm not trying to enter a thread that's been demarked as Physician - Administration, but I am curious as to whether the rating in question has been reinstated or not and, what the original date attached to it was.

kiddoc wrote: RateMDsJohn

kiddoc wrote:
RateMDsJohn wrote:

rating reinstated

i dont see it john, can you please provide a link where i can see this rating reinstated.

Sorry, it got removed again. I have now fixed it so it will stick. It is here:

http://www.ratemds.com/doctor-ratings/88561/Dr-Todd-Marcus-LIVONIA-MI.html

The rating is one of 2 dated 9/13/11.

RateMDsJohn wrote: kiddoc

RateMDsJohn wrote:
kiddoc wrote:
RateMDsJohn wrote:

rating reinstated

i dont see it john, can you please provide a link where i can see this rating reinstated.

Sorry, it got removed again. I have now fixed it so it will stick. It is here:

http://www.ratemds.com/doctor-ratings/88561/Dr-Todd-Marcus-LIVONIA-MI.html

The rating is one of 2 dated 9/13/11.

Goodness!! After reading these wonderful ratings I wish I could be a kid again & have this doctor. Or have had him for my kid. All kidding aside, I think pediatricians are the best as well as the sweetest doctors. Except for vets--I always wish they would take me for a patient!!

Katherine wrote: We are in

Katherine wrote:

We are in fact very, very, selective about what gets removed.

Katherine

is that so??

is anyone else starting to see a pattern to the "selectivity"?

**PLEASE NOTE THIS PATIENTS REVIEW WAS TAGGED AND REMOVED AS SPAM**

http://youtu.be/Gj0vX4TQzsw

need i continue?

John, how many videos does

John, how many videos does kiddoc need to produce in order for you to reinstate ALL his ratings?

He’s going to have to change professions and go into the movie making business.

I think he has gone through quite the effort to prove his point, not to say his patients who took the time to participate.

kiddoc wrote: Katherine

kiddoc wrote:
Katherine wrote:

We are in fact very, very, selective about what gets removed.

Katherine

is that so??

is anyone else starting to see a pattern to the "selectivity"?

need i continue?

Actually I kinda do need you to continue because I'm genuinely unsure of what it is you are trying to say.

Katherine wrote: kiddoc

Katherine wrote:
kiddoc wrote:
Katherine wrote:

We are in fact very, very, selective about what gets removed.

Katherine

is that so??

is anyone else starting to see a pattern to the "selectivity"?

**PLEASE NOTE THIS PATIENTS REVIEW WAS TAGGED AND REMOVED AS SPAM**

http://youtu.be/Gj0vX4TQzsw

need i continue?

Actually I kinda do need you to continue because I'm genuinely unsure of what it is you are trying to say.

on 09/13/2011 - 23:25 in a PM to me Katherine wrote:

Todd, you can't convince me. The only way I could be convinces was if I was a fly on the wall that you didn't know was there. That is the only way. I would have to SEE it.

you said you would have to SEE it to be convinced...well, now you can SEE it...just as you stated

kiddoc wrote: Katherine

kiddoc wrote:
Katherine wrote:
kiddoc wrote:
Katherine wrote:

We are in fact very, very, selective about what gets removed.

Katherine

is that so??

is anyone else starting to see a pattern to the "selectivity"?

**PLEASE NOTE THIS PATIENTS REVIEW WAS TAGGED AND REMOVED AS SPAM**

http://youtu.be/Gj0vX4TQzsw

need i continue?

Actually I kinda do need you to continue because I'm genuinely unsure of what it is you are trying to say.

on 09/13/2011 - 23:25 in a PM to me Katherine wrote:

Todd, you can't convince me. The only way I could be convinces was if I was a fly on the wall that you didn't know was there. That is the only way. I would have to SEE it.

you said you would have to SEE it to be convinced...well, now you can SEE it...just as you stated

No, I meant, what do you mean by this:

Quote:

is anyone else starting to see a pattern to the "selectivity"?

kiddoc wrote: Katherine

kiddoc wrote:
Katherine wrote:

We are in fact very, very, selective about what gets removed.

Katherine

is that so??

is anyone else starting to see a pattern to the "selectivity"?

**PLEASE NOTE THIS PATIENTS REVIEW WAS TAGGED AND REMOVED AS SPAM**

http://youtu.be/Gj0vX4TQzsw

need i continue?

I just checked on this. I believe the 4/5/11 rating is real, but that's not why the system removed it. The system removed it because the same computer left a second rating on 8/26/11.

John

RateMDsJohn wrote: I just

RateMDsJohn wrote:

I just checked on this. I believe the 4/5/11 rating is real, but that's not why the system removed it. The system removed it because the same computer left a second rating on 8/26/11.

John

john..the first rating dated 4/5/11 was taken down within 72 hrs of initially being posted..as you can see by the screenshot, this particular review does not appear on my physician profile as of 4/20/11..(see file properties)

therefore, how is it possible for your system to have found a second review from the same computer when the first one had been removed prior to the second one being posted

.

.

kiddoc wrote: . ?

kiddoc wrote:

.

?

I don't know what to tell

I don't know what to tell you. Our database is telling me something different.

John

RateMDsJohn wrote: I just

RateMDsJohn wrote:

I just checked on this. I believe the 4/5/11 rating is real,

Then why not simply resurrect the 4/5/11 rating?

kiddoc wrote: RateMDsJohn

kiddoc wrote:
RateMDsJohn wrote:

I just checked on this. I believe the 4/5/11 rating is real,

Then why not simply resurrect the 4/5/11 rating?

.

Recap of

RateMDsJohn wrote: I just

RateMDsJohn wrote:

I just checked on this. I believe the 4/5/11 rating is real,

JOHN, IF YOU BELIEVE THE 4/5/11 RATING IS REAL, WHY WONT YOU REINSTATE IT?

CONTINUING.. EXAMPLE

CONTINUING..

EXAMPLE 3

**PLEASE NOTE THIS PATIENTS REVIEW WAS TAGGED AND REMOVED AS SPAM**

i apologize for the end where it is difficult to see the patients handwritten documentation..i can provide originals if need be.

http://youtu.be/Y4XweSQQerU

john, youve ignored the pleas

john,

youve ignored the pleas of now 2 patients who have clearly identified themselves via video documention to you...

is this not a site for ratings by the patients, for the patients?

One thing that should never, ever be in doubt is that we care. I know that sounds corny but its true. We *care* about those who use this site to select their next doctor.

and what about respect? do you respect those who use this site, like my patients in the videos?

This site is here to help people, not ruin lives.

your silence is not "helpful"...should i take it as an admission of guilt?

kiddoc wrote: john, youve

kiddoc wrote:

john,

youve ignored the pleas of now 2 patients who have clearly identified themselves via video documention to you...

is this not a site for ratings by the patients, for the patients?

One thing that should never, ever be in doubt is that we care. I know that sounds corny but its true. We *care* about those who use this site to select their next doctor.

and what about respect? do you respect those who use this site, like my patients in the videos?

This site is here to help people, not ruin lives.

your silence is not "helpful"...should i take it as an admission of guilt?

I won't reinstate it because it's our policy to remove both ratings when someone posts twice.
I'm not going to make an exception in this case.

RateMDsJohn wrote: I won't

RateMDsJohn wrote:

I won't reinstate it because it's our policy to remove both ratings when someone posts twice.

If this is the case, and human nature being what it is, this must result in a multitude of instances where multiple attempts at submitting reviews have resulted in no review surviving, particularly when a patient attempts to replace a now missing review (or even update a previous one). That serves to do nothing more than to leave the submitter not knowing what happened to their review, adding to their frustration.

Technical aspects of review submission should not form the basis of the final analysis in assessing the validity of a review. An algorithm which targets suspicious reviews can be an effective tool, but it should not be a replacement for good judgment and effective dispute resolution. Of course, that would depend on effective communication.

Relying on technology would, and it appears that it does, serve to invalidate real, genuine reviews, as concluded by none other than yourself, even when very clearly explained by numerous physicians and patients who experience first hand their reviews disappearing.

In the end this all comes back to your faulty process of processing submitted patient reviews.

**2ND REQUEST** John, Can

**2ND REQUEST**

John,

Can you please address this example below that I posted last week? Thanks

kiddoc wrote:

CONTINUING..

EXAMPLE 3

**PLEASE NOTE THIS PATIENTS REVIEW WAS TAGGED AND REMOVED AS SPAM**

i apologize for the end where it is difficult to see the patients handwritten documentation..i can provide originals if need be.

http://youtu.be/Y4XweSQQerU

.

.

Todd, our system thinks the

Todd, our system thinks the same person posted this rating back in 2009:

"Ref. by R. Kushner and I will continue to take my daughter there forever! (Or at least til they kick me out.) I feel SO at ease & at home with Dr. Todd it's great. Dr. Todd, Betty, and Tina & staff have always been so kind and wonderful, i wished i worked there too! He provides great care for my daughter. Love him to bits & pieces and he is truely a great gift for caring for kids."

BTW, did you know that healthgrades.com is showing you rated at 3.5 out of 5?

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ie=UTF-8#hl=en&gs_nf=1&tok=dcePlk-6a8R8lXb_DPzasA&cp=15&gs_id=4&xhr=t&q=dr.+todd+marcus&pf=p&safe=off&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&oq=dr.+todd+marcus&gs_l=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=4a9f891eb1c200d7&biw=1366&bih=611

Maybe you can work on them for a while?

John

RateMDsJohn wrote: Todd, our

RateMDsJohn wrote:

Todd, our system thinks the same person posted this rating back in 2009:

"Ref. by R. Kushner and I will continue to take my daughter there forever! (Or at least til they kick me out.) I feel SO at ease & at home with Dr. Todd it's great. Dr. Todd, Betty, and Tina & staff have always been so kind and wonderful, i wished i worked there too! He provides great care for my daughter. Love him to bits & pieces and he is truely a great gift for caring for kids."

BTW, did you know that healthgrades.com is showing you rated at 3.5 out of 5?

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ie=UTF-8#hl=en&gs_nf=1&tok=dcePlk-6a8R8lXb_DPzasA&cp=15&gs_id=4&xhr=t&q=dr.+todd+marcus&pf=p&safe=off&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&oq=dr.+todd+marcus&gs_l=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=4a9f891eb1c200d7&biw=1366&bih=611

Maybe you can work on them for a while?

John

Or Doctorbase, where he apparently doesn't even have an entry at this time. Or Yelp, where he has no ratings whatsoever as of today: http://www.yelp.com/biz/marcus-todd-s-do-livonia (unless this is the wrong page, of course).

Interesting that a doctor with so many ratings here (47) and Vitals (81, including 5 in one day http://www.[another website]/doctors/Dr_Todd_Marcus#reviews - April 25, 2010) would have zero ratings elsewhere.

RateMDsJohn wrote: Todd, our

RateMDsJohn wrote:

Todd, our system thinks the same person posted this rating back in 2009:

"Ref. by R. Kushner and I will continue to take my daughter there forever! (Or at least til they kick me out.) I feel SO at ease & at home with Dr. Todd it's great. Dr. Todd, Betty, and Tina & staff have always been so kind and wonderful, i wished i worked there too! He provides great care for my daughter. Love him to bits & pieces and he is truely a great gift for caring for kids."

BTW, did you know that healthgrades.com is showing you rated at 3.5 out of 5?

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ie=UTF-8#hl=en&gs_nf=1&tok=dcePlk-6a8R8lXb_DPzasA&cp=15&gs_id=4&xhr=t&q=dr.+todd+marcus&pf=p&safe=off&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&oq=dr.+todd+marcus&gs_l=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=4a9f891eb1c200d7&biw=1366&bih=611

Maybe you can work on them for a while?

John

John,

On contacting the patient in video example #3 about the possibility of their having posted a review in 2009, they denied all knowledge of having made one. Regarding the unassociated review above, I'll simply say that any patient stating that they were referred by an obstetrician would have presented with a newborn, not toddlers, as is the case of the patient in video example #3 whose 2011 review was removed. I refer you to the video in which the patient clearly states the age of the children she presented as being three and five years of age. Further, at the time the unassociated rating above was made (4/5/09), the patient for whose rating I am seeking restoration, was not yet a patient of mine.

I used to provide my patients with a pamphlet (xerox) referring them to RateMDs.com and Vitals .com to submit reviews. The Vitals reviews provide an average rating of 3.8 out of 4, not 5. Arithmetically, that would equate to 4.75 out of 5 ( http://www.[another website]/doctors/Dr_Todd_Marcus). You might notice that Vitals continues to present my original reviews, which numbered some eighty-plus here, originally.

I appreciate your concern for my ratings at Healthgrades.com.

I will deal with them after I've dealt with you.

kiddoc wrote: RateMDsJohn

kiddoc wrote:
RateMDsJohn wrote:

Todd, our system thinks the same person posted this rating back in 2009:

"Ref. by R. Kushner and I will continue to take my daughter there forever! (Or at least til they kick me out.) I feel SO at ease & at home with Dr. Todd it's great. Dr. Todd, Betty, and Tina & staff have always been so kind and wonderful, i wished i worked there too! He provides great care for my daughter. Love him to bits & pieces and he is truely a great gift for caring for kids."

BTW, did you know that healthgrades.com is showing you rated at 3.5 out of 5?

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ie=UTF-8#hl=en&gs_nf=1&tok=dcePlk-6a8R8lXb_DPzasA&cp=15&gs_id=4&xhr=t&q=dr.+todd+marcus&pf=p&safe=off&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&oq=dr.+todd+marcus&gs_l=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=4a9f891eb1c200d7&biw=1366&bih=611

Maybe you can work on them for a while?

John

John,

On contacting the patient in video example #3 about the possibility of their having posted a review in 2009, they denied all knowledge of having made one.

Dr. Todd Marcus, has it occurred to you that you are way, way, WAY too fixated on your ratings? I'm serious. You have taken the time to do VIDEOS of your patients stating that they posted these ratings. The first guy looked INCREDIBLY uncomfortable with being in front of the camera. I still cannot believe that you asked that of him. Of any of them, really.

And BTW, when I said that I would need to be a fly on the wall that you could not see....this is not what I meant. I meant I would have to be able to watch you when you didn't know I was there. It was the only way I could think of that would allow me to be objectively (read: not subjective) certain that your ratings were genuine. This...cherry picking of patients to do video testimonials....is not equivalent.

kiddoc wrote:

I appreciate your concern for my ratings at Healthgrades.com.

I will deal with them after I've dealt with you.

O'Rly? ‘,:} And just how do you intend to 'deal' with John Swapceisnki?

kiddoc wrote: In the end this

kiddoc wrote:

In the end this all comes back to your faulty process of processing submitted patient reviews.

To reiterate something I said earlier in the thread:

http://www.ratemds.com/social/?q=node/56525#comment-219501

Quote:

You seem to think that your profile is representative of what the site's astroturf algorithm is doing. You seem to think that if you lost 40 ratings, then we must be removing ratings left, right and center across the site. This is not the case, not by a long shot.

I pulled together some numbers that show the overall impact of the algorithm.

Number of ratings received: 1,704,792
Number of ratings removed by the astroturf algorithm: 13,937
Number of physician profiles affected: 5,872
Number of physician profiles with more than 10 ratings removed by the algorithm: 135.

As you can see we are *not* removing ratings en masse. We are in fact very, very, selective about what gets removed.

Katherine

kiddoc wrote: EXAMPLE

kiddoc wrote:

EXAMPLE 3

**PLEASE NOTE THIS PATIENTS REVIEW WAS TAGGED AND REMOVED AS SPAM**

i apologize for the end where it is difficult to see the patients handwritten documentation..i can provide originals if need be.

http://youtu.be/Y4XweSQQerU

RateMDsJohn wrote:

Todd, our system thinks the same person posted this rating back in 2009:

"Ref. by R. Kushner and I will continue to take my daughter there forever! (Or at least til they kick me out.) I feel SO at ease & at home with Dr. Todd it's great. Dr. Todd, Betty, and Tina & staff have always been so kind and wonderful, i wished i worked there too! He provides great care for my daughter. Love him to bits & pieces and he is truely a great gift for caring for kids."

John

Patient Dropped Rating 03 - Reply to John's claim

kiddoc wrote: I appreciate

kiddoc wrote:

I appreciate your concern for my ratings at Healthgrades.com.

I'm not sure you appreciate it enough. Healthgrades gets way, way more traffic than RateMDs.com, and every one of their visitors to your page there see that you are a 3.5 out of 5 doctor. Not very good at all.

RateMDsJohn wrote: kiddoc

RateMDsJohn wrote:
kiddoc wrote:

I appreciate your concern for my ratings at Healthgrades.com.

I'm not sure you appreciate it enough. Healthgrades gets way, way more traffic than RateMDs.com, and every one of their visitors to your page there see that you are a 3.5 out of 5 doctor. Not very good at all.

No need to obfuscate. Healthgrades has no relevance to this discussion. On the other hand, are you suggesting that Healthgrades has a more reliable and honest system than RateMDs?

John Regarding Katherine's

John

Regarding Katherine's assertion that I spend too much time concerning myself with ratings, what then is the purpose of RateMDs? Should the public be able to reasonably rely on what is posted, or is it just entertainment, like the National Enquirer?

For goodness sakes gentlemen,

For goodness sakes gentlemen, put the tape measures away.

Maybe HealthGrades has more traffic, but I would bet the traffic to RateMds hangs around longer. People like to read comments. They like to interact with others on a forum. I can’t imagine any other rating sites which had a community of users who continuously returned to interact with each other the way RateMds did in the past. That was extremely unique and something I don’t think you appreciated John. There were often over a hundred guests online, right now there are 5.

Shouldn’t you be promoting your site? You need a PR person if for no other reason than to take the pressure off of you.

Also you are hijacking.

From my perspective it seems the algorithm is programmed such that some legitimate ratings are going down with the ship, possibly for the greater good. If that is an unfortunate consequence then just say so. I am only speculating, because you are really not addressing the issue.

You are not just ignoring one patient of kiddoc’s. The entire world is watching how you interact with the public. That may be an over exaggeration, but that is how you should look at it in my opinion.

MicOnTheNorthShore

MicOnTheNorthShore wrote:
RateMDsJohn wrote:
kiddoc wrote:

I appreciate your concern for my ratings at Healthgrades.com.

I'm not sure you appreciate it enough. Healthgrades gets way, way more traffic than RateMDs.com, and every one of their visitors to your page there see that you are a 3.5 out of 5 doctor. Not very good at all.

No need to obfuscate. Healthgrades has no relevance to this discussion. On the other hand, are you suggesting that Healthgrades has a more reliable and honest system than RateMDs?

Are you suggesting that kiddoc's non-stellar ratings at Healthgrades are more reliable and honest than his ratings here and on Vitals (which he admitted he solicited)?

gagal, you're right: I am

gagal, you're right: I am trying to hijack this thread because I don't have time to deal with all of kiddoc's complaints.

You are also right that our algorithm does sometimes delete legitimate ratings. If we tweak it so that every legitimate rating gets through, a whole lot of spam will also get through. We're trying to balance it as best we can.

The fact is, kiddoc has 47 ratings on RateMDs with an average of 4.8 out of 5.0. I contend that his listing contains more information than 99% of the doctors on our site, and that the vast majority of people looking for a doctor will be satisfied with reading that number of ratings. In fact, I doubt that most people will read them all anyway.

John

how far would you go to

how far would you go to protect your reputation?.. far as health grades goes... its a matter of percentage... for example... one doc in my area has 100 percent would refer to friend/family on health grades , but only 3 people took survey... another has a 91 percent refer rating, but 22 people took survey...Vital has review of a doc in my area which is more of his staff then his capability... its all a matter of interpetation.
I work for a doc who has new patients who say " I found him thru the internet, i researched and he had the most positive reviews". This appears to be a pissin contest between a business man and a medical man who is forced to think like a business man... all in my humble opinion

**3rd Request** RateMDsJohn

**3rd Request**

RateMDsJohn wrote:

You are also right that our algorithm does sometimes delete legitimate ratings. If we tweak it so that every legitimate rating gets through, a whole lot of spam will also get through. We're trying to balance it as best we can.

The fact is, kiddoc has 47 ratings on RateMDs with an average of 4.8 out of 5.0. I contend that his listing contains more information than 99% of the doctors on our site, and that the vast majority of people looking for a doctor will be satisfied with reading that number of ratings. In fact, I doubt that most people will read them all anyway.

John, my efforts are on two fronts, reputation and my patients' voices.

The removal of any review that does not represent a duplicate in itself amounts to arbitrary modification of not only my ongoing average but the tone of my rating in the words of my patients. Physicians' reputations are built to a large degree on patient word of mouth.

Secondly, when a patient's review is removed, that removes the voice given by the patient. My patients have taken the time to participate in your review process and further, to evidence their participation with video recorded testimony. One has gone so far as to refute your claim of having posted a review twice.

You have stated over the years that RateMDs is about patients being able to voice their opinions, both positive and negative, about their physicians, without interference from those physicians.

You have provided detail of the mechanism by which your system removes subsequent reviews originating from a similar IP address. Should patients suffer loss of their voiced opinion for erring by attempting to update a review through provision of a second submission rather than formally editing the first one, after having gone through the rigors of claiming it if not already linked to it? (I am making reference to your words above, and am not suggesting that my most recent video recorded patient erred in that manner.)

Every process has its weaknesses, especially those which we automate. You state that you are "trying to balance it as best we can" in addressing the incidental deletion of legitimate reviews attributable to seemingly common addresses. If that is so, why do you not take the word of the patient, twice given, who submitted the rating?

Recently, it was stated on the forum that originators of threads would no longer be able to delete them, with the reason being given that other users had expended time and effort in responding(http://www.ratemds.com/social/?q=node/45354). Does that not hold true in terms of patients participating in the review process?

Errors happen. Not remedying them is wrong.

1. 09/13/2011 rating
RateMDs Dropped Rating 01
Resolved (reinstated)

2. 04/05/2011 rating
RateMDs Dropped Rating 02
John claims second rating from same computer on 08/26/2011
Screenshot shows that 04/05/11 rating taken down prior to 04/20/11 screenshot, negating possibility of 08/26/2011 review becoming a duplicate.
Unresolved

3. 09/13/2011 rating
RateMDs Dropped Rating 03
John claims 09/13/2011 rating is a duplicate of a previous 2009 rating
Patient addresses this, stating that she had not been a patient of Kiddoc in 2009 (
Patient Dropped Rating 03 - Reply to John's claim)
Unresolved

Kiddoc

RateMDs Dropped Rating

RateMDs Dropped Rating Example 04 - 09/13/2011

RateMDs Dropped Rating 04

**PLEASE NOTE THIS PATIENTS REVIEW WAS TAGGED AND REMOVED SHORTLY AFTER ORIGINALLY POSTED**

kiddoc wrote: RateMDs Dropped

kiddoc wrote:

RateMDs Dropped Rating Example 04 - 09/13/2011

RateMDs Dropped Rating 04

**PLEASE NOTE THIS PATIENTS REVIEW WAS TAGGED AND REMOVED SHORTLY AFTER ORIGINALLY POSTED**

Rating reinstated. Thank you

John

RateMDsJohn wrote: kiddoc

RateMDsJohn wrote:
kiddoc wrote:

RateMDs Dropped Rating Example 04 - 09/13/2011

RateMDs Dropped Rating 04

**PLEASE NOTE THIS PATIENTS REVIEW WAS TAGGED AND REMOVED SHORTLY AFTER ORIGINALLY POSTED**

Rating reinstated. Thank you

John

Thank you John.

My pediatric patients'

My pediatric patients' parent, Lee Kurche, has recorded a third video request (RateMDs Dropped Rating Example 03 - 2nd Reply to RateMDsJohn's claim) that her 09/13/2011 physician review be reinstated. In the video she asks why no action has been taken by RateMDs following her personal requests.

She states:

"This is Lee Kurche. These are my children right here and this is my third video.
I'm just wondering why nothing has been posted. Why ? Thank you."

What more is needed to permit this patient's review to be included with those of my other patients? Does she not rank equally with others in being allowed to exercise her freedom of speech? Mrs. Kurche has stated very clearly that she rated me on the one occasion.

Apparently, the site's system takes issue with this, "believing" a second review was submitted via her computer, ostensibly by her, something she takes issue with. Is this not the very system that Kat as recent as yesterday i believe, clearly stated:

The spam filter must be acting up again. It does that sometimes. Doesn't matter what you post, it just flag things as spam almost at random.

Are we now taking the "belief" of a bunch of chips and wires over the simple statement of an individual?

Remove, delete, bury, send to the bit bucket, whatever it is that the RateMDs system believes is a secondary submission and reinstate the patient's real and sincere rating!

John, this is not a complicated remedy, and you have the patient's own videorecorded submission of her testimony as to her actions.

What more is needed?

Kiddoc

History:
RateMDs Dropped Rating Example 03 - 09/13/2011
RateMDs Dropped Rating Example 03 - 1st Reply to RateMDsJohn's claim
RateMDs Dropped Rating Example 03 - 2nd Reply to RateMDsJohn's claim
(John claims 09/13/2011 rating is a duplicate of a previous 2009 rating.)

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.