As I understand it, one of the objectives of following forum rules are quoted below:
_______________________________________________________________________________________
“The rules of the Forum have been developed over time, this is to protect any misleading or inaccurate content being shared with the wider audience.
Please ensure any external links to articles/videos are shared with the Admin team for validity. This is because we strive to ensure the Forum is a safe environment for all members, therefore we ask that the links have been approved on behalf of the AF Association.”________________________________________________________________________________________
Most charities tend to rely very much on support from members who volunteer their time, energy and experience for the benefit of others who reach out to the charity for help and support. It is assumed that charities tend to appreciate the help provided by their members because very often, without it they would find it very difficult to fulfil their objectives in supporting their members. Of course, forums can and do provide a valuable vehicle for sharing information but sometimes they can bring additional challenges which need to be managed to ensure nothing is compromised. However, if there is no tangible benefit, adding to the workload will have a negative effect. Although your members may not be experienced in managing a charity and/or forum, it’s very likely that they possess a wealth and variety of experience which might be worthy of some consideration.
In a commercial environment, enforcing change for the sake of change is rarely a good idea. If it ain’t broke, don’t mend it is a simple, classic example of good management.
Up until now, within an instant, we could immediately provide newly diagnosed members with expert advice from medical experts that will have an immediate impact on their ability to come to terms with their condition and Admin seems unable or unwilling to recognise this simple fact. Surely this is even more critical when members find it almost impossible to seek face to face medical assistance from a doctor, any doctor let alone a specialist.
So it’s always a good idea to assess the need for change rather than enforcing it on a whim. Hope you agree on the concept.
It should be easy to determine, excluding the recent legitimate links which are now included, how many links you have had to remove in say, the last 6 month which have fallen foul of the rules relating to promoting, advertising or drawing attention to someone’s website, blog, product or business. If the answer is possibly as near to zero as makes no difference, perhaps the need for change becomes less necessary.
If there have been any genuine links removed, the next step would be to establish how you were made aware of these infringements. The options are limited to either Admin input or members reports. Of course, without the data it’s not possible to know, but from what has been said in the past, I would imagine Admin input is as close to zero as makes no difference. Therefore, if there have been any member reports, any change you impose which is clearly not essential would likely alienate the very people that so far have helped you to keep this forum a welcoming and safe place for members to ask questions and share information.
Is it really surprising therefore, that members who perhaps possess a better understanding of basic management than Admin might give them credit for are angry and disappointed at having change imposed which is unnecessary and will achieve no additional benefits to anyone, on the contrary, it will stop them from being helped quickly and effectively.
Of course it’s your charity, your forum and your responsibility to make it work and of course, we are not aware if there are any genuine external influences such as your relationship with HealthUnlocked. Perhaps it might be helpful if any members of this forum who have experience of using other HUL forums could tell us if they are aware of any similar rules enforced by other forums.
I hope there is no suggestion that I have been disrespectful or unreasonable in my assessment of the situation that would cause this post to be deleted…….