Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2016 14:11:22 GMT
I'd like the site owner or his administrators (and not fellow users) to please explain the changes to this site as follows:
1) If this position exists at all, who is/are the moderator(s)? 2) Why was the shoutbox removed? 3) Why is a long standing moderator no longer even registered on the site let alone moderating this site?
I understand the last question might be subject to a restricted answer, but I think long standing members need to be told something.
|
|
|
Post by Kathymel on Mar 28, 2016 9:05:26 GMT
Quite a few of us would like answers to these questions and more, journeyman. Letters have been written several times to the admins. The last one asked them for a public statement that the site would in future be non-discriminatory and equitable and was signed by ten of us.
We did not receive a reply.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2016 11:00:01 GMT
If AADDUK is actually a registered charity, and I can't find their charity number, then it needs to conform to certain standards and procedures.
A moderator on a message board is a volunteer, just like any volunteer in a charity shop, and their actions, good or bad, require appraisal according to an agreed standard of behaviour as in any workplace.
Not only that, their health and mental wellbeing also needs to be appraised as well as their suitability to be a volunteer in their first place such that they are afforded some protection from any harm - self inflicted or otherwise.
In other words, people who run charities have a duty of care to their staff and volunteers, as well as those they provide services for.
It's not good enough just to pull the shutters down and let the tumbleweed race along the desert.
These people either need to take responsibility or close their "charity" and reopen (if able) once they've got proper procedures in place. Many people, including myself, have given lots of time and effort to this project. The very least that deserves is some respect from the owners.
If responsibility isn't taken, then people are entitled to report matters to the Charity Commission.
|
|
|
Post by Kathymel on Mar 28, 2016 16:56:35 GMT
Unfortunately, the Charity Commission is only interested if a charity is financially insolvent, committing fraud or another illegal activity or is seriously harming people.
|
|
|
Post by annie on Mar 28, 2016 18:22:09 GMT
Hi Journeyman
Before responding to your questions, although I can't answer all of them, here's a bit of background history.
AADD-UK was set up in 2008 as a response to the newly published NICE ADHD Guidelines. Before that time ADHD was seen as a condition which only applied to children/young people who were felt to normally grow out of it by late teens. NICE,for the first time recognised that for many individuals the condition could be life long. Whilst the Guidelines were very much welcomed it was very evident many, many adults would struggle to have their condition recognised by Adult Mental Health Services. Until 2008, young people had their treatment discontinued with the result that the majority of AMHS had never had to treat the condition. Consequently many adult psychiatrists lacked the necessary training or expertise to assess,dx and treat ADHD.
Myself and the other two Admins got together when the guidelines were in development and formed ourselves as a charity. Initially we did this so we could comment, from an adult user perspective, on the guidelines as they were being developed. Shortly after the NICE publication we decided to set up this website with the knowledge that many adults would struggle to navigate their way through the complex NHS system. Our hope was, and is, that those adults who felt they may have ADHD would benefit from the information on the website and,through the forum, receive encouragement and support to achieve a proper assessment,dx and treatment. As can be seen from those people who have only recently signed up, there is still a long way to go!!
Kathymel has helpfully listed, the ways in which the Charities Commission can intervene. None of these situations apply to AADD-UK. As stated on the website, our charity does not receive any funding. All the information on the website has been provided by the three of us who felt committed to supporting adults with ADHD. In no small measure, the forum has very much benefited from the willingness of members to offer peer to peer support. It has also been a means for people to forge alliances and set up support groups in their own locality.
In relation to your questions:
Atticus, roland and myself are, and have always been moderators on this site, albeit we have a different "title"
The website does need updating and changes will be taking place over the next few months. Some parts of the website are rarely used or only used by a few and the shoutbox was one of them, hence its demise.
With regards to question three, people are free to register or de-register themselves.
I hope the above puts a perspective into how AADD-UK came about and how it's currently maintained.
|
|
|
Post by Kathymel on Mar 28, 2016 18:51:17 GMT
Actually, having looked again at the Charity Commission's complaints form, I think some of the non-compliance with discrimination law that has occurred on here would fit into this heading:
- Serious non-compliance in a charity that damages or has the potential to damage its reputation and/or the reputation of charities generally
You may have sacked the perpetrator, but you have not addressed the issues nor given assurance, as repeatedly asked, that it will not happen again in the future.
So, as you and the other admins have failed to answer the concerns of the many members who have contacted you through private channels, I will ask you publicly this time.
Will you:
- make it forum policy that discrimination in any form will not be tolerated? - provide assurances that you will do your utmost to ensure this forum is a safe place for ALL members to visit. - stop deleting comments that complain about sexism and other discrimination? - stop banning and blocking people who post on this forum about the need for equitable access for all?
I'm sure other members will have their own points to add.
|
|
|
Post by blaze on Mar 28, 2016 19:40:20 GMT
I am not a long standing or terribley involved member here, and certainly the details of this are over my head, but well there's a fair bit that's obvious from various threads i have been on also.....
but that aside as pp has pointed out other members may have other things toadd- after one thread censored heavilyas * women's experience of adhd had already been done so we should shut up already* i recueved a good bye pm (as i am sure other did) from someone who obviously got a huge amount of support from this forum, and contributed even more support & knowledge & hope to others. Imo it is a damn shame that this person (and possibley others) leave because of what very much appeared to be tolerated sexism. Ironicly the same person censoring that thread jumped down my throat for my apparent *censoring* another poster when i politely pointed out their comments could be disablist under the context & could hurt other posters.
Surely any charity, especially one for disabilities, should have a basic guideline (written or otherwise) of respecting all protected groups under the equalities act. I appriciate these may be *teeny* infractions but they caused atleast one person to feel unsafe & leave- surely like pp says it wouldn't be much to ask that there is some form of clarification that sexism wont be tolerated- it shouldn't need said, but looks like it does in light of this.
I guess this may not be terribley relevant given that there's obviously alot gone on that i don't know about but as pp is suggesting others should add this particular event left a nasty taste & i am guessing to anyone who is vulnerable & at risk could have had a much more serious effect.
|
|
|
Post by Kathymel on Mar 28, 2016 20:14:40 GMT
And whilst I'm being blunt, let's be honest about the shoutbox, shall we? It sat there for years not bothering anybody. People would post in it now and then and sometimes it got quite busy. There was no need to remove it because it was incredibly low-maintenance, regardless of how often it was used. People liked it, though.
The only reason it got removed this time was because people were asking awkward questions in it, like where Pelargonium had gone after Dave banned her for complaining about his sexism.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2016 22:06:43 GMT
annie, thank you for coming back to me. However, before I respond to the points you made, could I please clarify with you the following: 1) According to the AADD-UK constitution created on the 27th February 2011 (found here), AGMs are supposed to be held once a year. Are the minutes available to view for all AGMs from that date until the last in 2016, 2015 or otherwise? 2) Who are the current Trustees of AADD-UK? 3) Is AADD-UK a registered or non-registered UK charity? I ask because this is not made clear on your website. 4) If AADD-UK is a registered UK charity, what is it's charity number? Thank you for attending to this matter
|
|
|
Post by vagueandrandom on Mar 29, 2016 11:28:36 GMT
I know I've said this before about the shoutbox, but I liked to say hi sometimes, if I didn't feel like posting.
and the insomniacs reminded each other of the time. . .
and I've witnessed at least one cry for help which I was able do something about. . .
there was no reason for it to go except that some of the comments were criticising admin in the turmoil earlier this year.
|
|
|
Post by roland on Mar 29, 2016 14:57:07 GMT
Contrary what Kathmel has stated in an earlier post, I deleted the shoutbox because it attracted the wrong sort of web spiders (e.g. spam bots which tended to overload the system) and in addition the shoutbox software also caused a disproportionate strain on resources. It was not well-used enough to justify these strains. And finally I must apologise because it was my fault for forgetting to warn people that the shoutbox was going.
|
|
|
Post by contrarymary on Mar 29, 2016 15:15:21 GMT
thank you for explainingthe technical issue roland if that is the case, why has an anchor been put on @addjourneyman temporary shoutbox to remove it from the most recent threads, and lots of very old threads (from 2013) dumped onto the Recent Threads to bump it down even more quickly? , it was having a reassuring conversation about BST and putting the clocks back/forwards being an issue when you have adhd. perhaps you could explain what the issue was with that conversation? thank you
|
|
|
Post by Kathymel on Mar 29, 2016 15:45:25 GMT
Are you going to discuss the other issues with us? As a charity, you have a duty of care towards the users of this site. This is law - you can't just ignore it. You have repeatedly allowed a moderator to discriminate against members with several protected characteristics for at least two years. This is something you have to accept responsibility for and answer to: Instead, you have: - blocked members who have asked to discuss this on the forum
- deleted comments and threads which ask for clarification or question your methods
- anchored threads to move them off the first page of the Recent Threads list to prevent people from seeing them and, in the case of this thread, actually moved several older threads above it
Why will you not engage with us with this? This is a total failure to be transparent and is underhand in the extreme. Those of us who have concerns have deliberately kept it off the forum until now so as not to impact on it. I had taken a step back to concentrate on my degree, intending to resume trying to engage with you when I have finished, but Journeyman's post has re-ignited how angry I feel about your actions (or lack of) and I am not going to let this go, now. Do the right thing. I fully expect to be deleted and blocked now, as this has been your modus operandi when faced with complaints. In case I am, would the other members who share my concerns please let people know why I have left.
|
|
|
Post by roland on Mar 30, 2016 12:39:50 GMT
We thoroughly investigated the original complaint and found that there was genuine misunderstanding as well as fault on both sides. Both parties have now left the forum so it is therefore inappropriate for others to continue to perpetuate this argument.
We will not tolerate personal attacks against other forum members or indeed against ourselves. We have been remarkably tolerant up to this point but as result of this continuing vendetta, which is masquerading as a crusade against discrimination, we will now be making some changes to the forum which may include, amongst other things, either reducing or abolishing the member ranking system or other actions as we see fit. We will announce these changes ahead of time across all boards.
As a final word, we add that we are disappointed that there are a few individuals within the ADHD community who would appear to prefer expending their energy attacking one another instead of using that energy to either encourage and support the implementation of local ADHD services or to encourage and support the expansion of existing local ADHD services in their own areas. If you would like our advice and support with getting local ADHD services established or expanded we are more than willing to help. This thread is now locked.
|
|