# Post Placement Board



## ~ Chux ~ (Apr 8, 2003)

Firstly I would like to apologise that you have been waiting for a resolution to this issue - I hope you will understand that the whole site management team have spent alot of time discussing not only recent issues on the PP board, but also the way forward.

We have taken the decision to permanently close the post placement adoption board.

This decision has not been taken lightly and we appreciate that many have gained support from it. Finding ways to continue to provide support is always our priority. However, in view of recent concerns over security, we feel it is not within our gift to guarantee your privacy. This leaves Fertility Friends and any members of such a 'closed board' vulnerable. By having a 'closed' board members are perhaps given a false sense of security - but with all the best intentions, and despite hard work and research by the board volunteers and site administrators, we can never be 100% sure that someone is who or what they say they are. In considering this course of action, we have looked at what and how other Adoption forums operate (none that we know of have a private area like this) and what the personal and legal implications for all concerned are should there be a security breach.

I would also like to take this opportunity to remind members that Fertility Friends, like most other forum sites, is a public website and the majority of it can be viewed by members and guests alike. Please be aware of this when writing posts or creating your forum profile.

Chux


----------



## wynnster (Jun 6, 2003)

Extremely disappointed that this was the decision made - I'm afraid FF will be losing alot of members due to this and these members will of course be losing the support which they very much need. 

What will happen to all of our posts from this section?


----------



## Caz (Jul 21, 2002)

Your posts will remain archived in a private area for now.  I can reassure you they will not become publicly available at any point.


----------



## keemjay (Jan 19, 2004)

really disappointed with this decision..especially as i am still unaware of what the 'issues' acually were..there seems to be have been a knee jerk reaction to a (probably my) simple question about members..with the result being persistant locking of threads which in effect  'gagged' anyone on the pp board who were left in the dark and wanted to what was going on! Was there something more than this? if so i would like to know..if it was my post alone then i would like to apologise to all PP members for kickstarting this unfortunate chain of events  

i personally have never been under the impression nor have expected 'guaranteed security' within the post placement board. i have always been acutely aware that i dont 'know' who i am posting to and with this in mind have posted under this risk..we have all posted very carefully within there..still not using childrens names nor posting our whereabouts freely..its a small risk, i and others, have been prepared to take for the sake of support that is so important post having a child placed. i would be prepared to sign a disclaimer if thats any good  

its a shame that like everywhere else in this country FF has succumbed to the fear of legal redress..and i feel PP should not take the brunt of that fear..to me there would be similar issues with posting clinic info..and nobody has stopped the clinic boards from operating   its a fact that everybody on this entire site is posting sensitive information and everybody does so at their own risk..so why pick on PP as a 'security risk'? 
FF lights the way as far as IF support goes..its unrivalled and unique and shines like a beacon...just because 'other' sites dont have private boards doesnt mean FF cant..why cant FF Post Placement support lead the way too  

kj x


----------



## keemjay (Jan 19, 2004)

ps could i request this thread isnt locked so that others may have their say/offer throughs/say their goodbyes

thank you
kjx


----------



## Anthony Reid (Jan 1, 2002)

wynnster, The closure was decided in part because it was too much work going through deleting all of your posts in the various threads of that board.

In addition to that - if people are posting discussions that has potentially serious and possible legal implications post adoption - then we have to consider whether the internet is the best place for it.  The board access was based on application, and that means that anyone could eventually have access.

So by closing it - and referring people to semipublic boards we hopefully remind people that what they are posting is public, and the potential risk to the discovery of the location of an adoptived child is reduced.

Sorry if its heavy handed - but these are serious issues.

Hope that helps provide an understanding of why we have done this.

Tony
x

ps. Yes - I received your messages via ********, sorry for not responding - just been a bit too burnt out to respond to lots of things lately.


----------



## wynnster (Jun 6, 2003)

Tony Reid said:


> wynnster, The closure was decided in part because it was too much work going through deleting all of your posts in the various threads of that board.


Oh great, line me up for firing!!! - Sorry to all the members for having it taken away


----------



## Anthony Reid (Jan 1, 2002)

wynnster said:


> Tony Reid said:
> 
> 
> > wynnster, The closure was decided in part because it was too much work going through deleting all of your posts in the various threads of that board.
> ...


I'm not lining you up for firing... silly.

The board was closed due to too much confidential stuff in there - that could have implications down the line.

People sometimes get too comfortable posting and forget that FF is public... thats all hun.


----------



## Tarango (Nov 3, 2006)

Wynn - we certainly don't blame you - it looks like it was on its way out anyway 




still sad though!!


----------



## wynnster (Jun 6, 2003)

Isn't it possible for us to have slapped wrists and a reminder.... it's our information and what we post is surely down to us and not the site - could we tick a box or something to say we wont hold ff responsible etc etc.......

With regards to whats alredy in there people can go through and delete whatever personally.

Or leave that one closed and start a new one with actual rules? I think we all felt more comfortable as we were told it wasn't 'public'....

We have been left homeless, with nowhere to discuss issues that affect only us as adoptive parents. Posting on 'Parenting adopted children' Is not the same and tends to get jumped on by other well meaning members, in the same respect we cannot join 'birth clubs' as other parents just don't understand why our children are parented differently and you do not receive the same support as you do from those who have walked the same path. 
Pretty pretty please - *Bring back Post Placement!!  *


----------



## Anthony Reid (Jan 1, 2002)

We have spent a huge amount of time discussing this, both over posts and via group video conferencing - very much stroking the midnight hours. It was not an easy decision.

If we did open it again, it would be subject to a plan being put forward and agreed with the admin team. It would also need to be a clean/empty board.

Why not put your heads together and come up with a 'better' method of operating something like this.

I cannot say it wil be agreed though, I am not the only admin you need to convince.


----------



## wynnster (Jun 6, 2003)

Tony Reid said:


> Why not put your heads together and come up with a 'better' method of operating something like this.


Ok, can we put our heads together in PP?  - Leave it with us then and we will have a think, not sure what we can come up with though not knowing what the site is capable of


----------



## Anthony Reid (Jan 1, 2002)

Yes - and most things


----------



## keemjay (Jan 19, 2004)

i'm up for chatting it out..just bonkers busy couple of days packing up my kitchen so cant contribute right now even tho i'd like to..just sticking up my hand and saying 'ay'

kj x


----------



## Anjelissa (Jan 11, 2007)

Hi Tony & Admin team,

I do have one idea and it's just off the top of my head..........
How about if within the rules there is a set amount of time as a member/number of posts accumulated etc (and a relatively long timespan as a member and high number of posts) on the general board before you are allowed access to PP? (even if this time/number of posts is kept confidential to FF admin).
Most of us have been on FF for years through IVF and such like, or at the very least have contributed for a while on the general adoption chat thread through our assessment process prior to joining PP so are well and truly 'known'. 
Hopefully this way anyone just joining FF with dubious intentions would lose interest or patience before they reach the point of being allowed access to PP.
I know this could exclude adopters who actually join FF post placement, but surely it would be a while before people in this situation would even realise there is a PP private area and most people would have 'felt their way around' a bit first and joined general chat threads etc prior to requesting access to a private area anyway. 
As I said it's only off the top of my head and of course only addresses one of the rules and only in part, but surely it go some way to protect PP security?

Fellow PP'ers.........
I am multi tasking making a banana cake & cooking dinner  (Nemo is at Grandma & Grandad's for a couple of hours) and as per usual I've somehow ended up here!! How does that always happen!?   
Whatever happens, I hope we don't all lose contact.
Catch you all later,
Anj x


----------



## popsi (Oct 11, 2007)

oh i have just seen this, i so hope that something can be sorted and it be re-opened even if subject to a total desclaimer from FF saying that its not 100 per cent guaranteed or something.....oh and i love anj thoughts too ..

tony... you do a wonderful job and hope you can help us too x


----------



## Debs (Mar 22, 2002)

Hi girls,

Hope you dont mind me popping in but as I have been involved in the debate surrounding pp and knowing all the issues surrounding it - thought it would help me and of course my fellow admins if I asked questions as and when I saw something I need further clarification on    Please dont think by asking im being negative - far from it   but the more we know the more it will help  

Just going to  Anjelissas post can I ask:

The idea about people joining FF post placement ........... and how they wouldnt request joining your board straight away as they woudlnt know about it.  How do they get to know about it?  Is it invitation only?  Sorry I might be being a bit   but if they dont know its there how can they request joining    Or is it the case they have to wait to be invited?

Thanks

Love

Debs xxx


----------



## Dee Jay (Jan 10, 2005)

I have to say that I'm astounded as to why this decision has been taken!! 
lots of us - me included rely on PP for advice and support - on the understanding that yes it is a "public" but protected forum - surely it's our information, and our risk to take?! 
I cannot believe that it's been withdrawn! For what reason??
I for one am friends with most PP members on ********, so I shall post in our Locked and Secret group on there - for the suport and advice that I need.
Dxxx


----------



## Anjelissa (Jan 11, 2007)

Hi Debs,

I was just thinking in line with how it was previously. I can't remember exactly what it said under the title now, but didn't it say something along of the lines of 'access by request only' or something?
I didn't mean for it to be secret, what I meant by 'they wouldn't necessarily know about it straight away' was that a newcomer to FF would most likely join the general threads for a while or firstly post their own messages etc I would imagine before noticing PP. Of course I'm only going by how I was when I first joined FF. 
I just thought this may then stop anyone with dubious motives asking for access with no previous history on FF.

If a newcomer, eg with no prior posts or history (so you had no way of judging motives) were to ask about access, wouldn't it be fair just to explain to them at that point that as it was a secure board, they hadn't yet reached the criteria for being granted access and explain that criteria (if it were to be made public). Hopefully as I said earlier if the level of history required was a reasonable amount it would be far less attractive to an opportunist with dubious intentions. 
If the exact amount of history required were to be held back then maybe they could just be pointed in the direction of other areas that may help them within the general adoption section for the time being.

I would imagine though that as there were only about 20-30 members (if I remember rightly) that it would only be very rare and a handful of people over a long period of time who wouldn't meet the criteria straight away.
Judging by people who were on the original list, most of us requested access after chatting on the general adoption chat thread for quite a while first and many of us knew each other already, so hopefully that would still be the case?  

As I said though, this was all an idea off the top of my head, I'm obviously not in your line of work and can imagine all the security and technical issues you have to deal with so I apologise if my idea wouldn't be workable in practice.

Thanks,

Anj x


----------



## Anthony Reid (Jan 1, 2002)

Dee Jay said:


> I have to say that I'm astounded as to why this decision has been taken!!
> lots of us - me included rely on PP for advice and support - on the understanding that yes it is a "public" but protected forum - surely it's our information, and our risk to take?!
> I cannot believe that it's been withdrawn! For what reason??
> I for one am friends with most PP members on ********, so I shall post in our Locked and Secret group on there - for the suport and advice that I need.
> Dxxx


Maybe read the rest of the thread - it kind of covers your question.


----------



## wynnster (Jun 6, 2003)

Just a few things floating in my little head 

How about - One thread about PP at the top of the board saying that admin only grant access once criteria is met.
Criteria is kept secret but for me personally I think access should be granted to:
Long standing members (ie - not just joined)
A contributing poster (not someone who joined 6 months ago but never posted....)
(just an idea, dont shoot me girls) A paying fee...... £5 donation to join    - That bit would certainly put those off who wouldn't be likely to use it or those just being nosey. 
( When I volunteered for this board I never received a request to join this board, I contacted the members after vetting them - by that I mean, checking their previous posts and seeing if everything added up, how long they've been ff members etc.  )

Then -

Each time PP members log on to the PP board a box comes up - access only granted once you tick the box to say you've read the PP terms and conditions - You must not post names / locations etc etc FF is not responsible for the content within etc 

How does that sound??

Wynn x


----------



## Anthony Reid (Jan 1, 2002)

The fee to join would be a non starter hun - It goes against our philosophy of supporting people at the point of need.

The admin team are reading this thread though and responses are being formed - so please keep the suggestions coming.


----------



## keemjay (Jan 19, 2004)

Tony with the greatest respect..noting your sarcastic response to Dee Jay...most of us are STILL not sure, despite repeatedly asking, why, exactly, it was withdrawn in the first place..we're sort of getting the idea but i'm none the wiser as to what events led up to it being shut so dramatically..you've hinted at wynns involvement   but nothing more..

in response to Debs post..you're welcome to ask questions..its nice to know our opinion is being sought as i'm not sure an adopters POV has particularly been sought up to now, it appears our fate has been in the hands of admin, none of whom, as far as I'm aware are adopters and  would have any particular interest in the board one way or another (except perhaps boggy..not sure if she, as temp m.o.d. has had any input)

just seen wynns post..agree with the criteria she has listed (except the fee  )
and just for info..without being a m.o.d  i also do everything wynn did to check on people who i havent seen about before..proper detective i am..thats how much care i take to protect myself

kj x


----------



## Anthony Reid (Jan 1, 2002)

Mel and I are three years down the adoption route keemjay.


----------



## wynnster (Jun 6, 2003)

Tony Reid said:


> The fee to join would be a non starter hun - It goes against our philosophy of supporting people at the point of need.
> 
> The admin team are reading this thread though and responses are being formed - so please keep the suggestions coming.


 What other ways are there that you vet people? I know you can see where people are posting (as in location etc) so could there be security questions admin could ask (only the member wanting access wouldn't know its for security) 

Oh how about - (might be going a bit far) Do you need to input an address to join ff? I can't remember so long ago... Maybe sending the member a pin number or something (although that wouldn't necessarily give us any more security other than an address  ) But - you could charge a fee to cover this - surely, just a small one


----------



## Anthony Reid (Jan 1, 2002)

Just curious - but another admin has just raised the question and I'd appreciate your thoughts....



> If they are saying they're still careful what they post despite it being a restricted board, what is the difference with posting there or the other adoption boards? What is it they are actually posting about that they don't want seen by others?


Bearing in mind - that you are censoring your own posts.


----------



## Dee Jay (Jan 10, 2005)

Hi Tony,
I for one can be very sarcastic, but sometimes realise that it's just not worth it on ocassion. 
As KeemJay says I too have no idea why the thread was just "removed" - we were not consulted / informed, just left to our own devices and left to wonder where it had gone? and why? Surely if we don't know the problem/ issue then how can we help to resolve it?
I acknowledge what you say  "The fee to join would be a non starter hun - It goes against our philosophy of supporting people at the point of need" The irony is that PP is our point of need!!
Dxxx


----------



## wynnster (Jun 6, 2003)

As I see it:-
The closure came about because, I brought up to then moderator of our thread about access to the PP board (just because I was cautious as to why members were granted access so close together) As I said before I always waited for member to approach me...
I gave another suggestion as to how access could be granted and received a non-helpful reply. In response to this I asked Tony to delete my posts as I then had no control over who would then gain access (and it was taking me a while to do myself  )
This then brought up all the possibilities of what 'could' happen and I suppose FF is just protecting itself - If we could all help in coming up with a solution then we might reach an agreement to have PP back


----------



## wynnster (Jun 6, 2003)

Tony Reid said:


> Just curious - but another admin has just raised the question and I'd appreciate your thoughts....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Things like -
We are being considered for another lo - he has limited movement and parents are ivdu's - what are people views on this 
Or
My son has smeared feaces all over his room - can anyone help me deal with this behaviour.
Or
We had a great dayout today, we went on the 'eye' and houses of parliment.

Or

At my daughters school they have a different type of intake they do older ones first then the younger ones dont start till after half term

All of these issues are ones I would not discuss on an open forum. The bottom two are about being located and the top ones are sensitive issues I wouldn't feel comfortable with posting, only to those who I know are there going through the same issues and not judging me - Unfortunately on open boards you get well meaning 'I hope you dont mind my posting but i'm a teacher and many children do XYZ'


----------



## Anthony Reid (Jan 1, 2002)

That makes sense - and we do have alternative methods for stuff like that - like anonymous posting... Although we haven't used it on the public side of the website.


----------



## wynnster (Jun 6, 2003)

Tony Reid said:


> That makes sense - and we do have alternative methods for stuff like that - like anonymous posting... Although we haven't used it on the public side of the website.


We had an anonymous poster not so long ago, but we all knew who it was, it didn't take a genius to work it out


----------



## Anthony Reid (Jan 1, 2002)

wynnster said:


> Tony Reid said:
> 
> 
> > That makes sense - and we do have alternative methods for stuff like that - like anonymous posting... Although we haven't used it on the public side of the website.
> ...


Well we have the ability for posts to be stripped of all information other than the message itself.


----------



## keemjay (Jan 19, 2004)

things i post about that are 'sensitive' would be
my childrens Birth family, their background, some of their medical history,
questions my children ask about their background and how they and i handle it
issues about contact and my feelings surrounding it

its not that i'm posting all the time about these things, the point is that in order to support someone else who asks a question sometimes you need to answer more personally to demonstrate the point

kj

ps tony, sorry its such a well kept secret i'd forgotten about you and mel

pps yes i was just thinking about that anonymous poster just then lol


----------



## Anthony Reid (Jan 1, 2002)

kj - dont worry - Mel and I are not keeping it a secret, we cannot really use FF for support - and so it doesn't get mentioned on here much.


----------



## wynnster (Jun 6, 2003)

Tony - even in doing that there are so few of us really that we would 'know' who it is, or guess..... (depending on the issue of course) but things like baby, toddler, school age child etc we would just know and personally I still wouldn't feel safe posting - even anonymously.


----------



## keemjay (Jan 19, 2004)

wynnster said:


> Just a few things floating in my little head
> 
> How about - One thread about PP at the top of the board saying that admin only grant access once criteria is met.
> Criteria is kept secret but for me personally I think access should be granted to:
> ...


so what do you think about this tony..is there a flaw in this plan at all?
i would add that members access to be reviewed every few months (4/6) to see whether they post or not and access withdrawn if they are not actually using it..and by using it i mean, posting regularly..i know people dont often have time to post but i think we'd all recognise someone who wasnt actually participating much

kj x


----------



## curvycat (Apr 8, 2008)

In regard to a PP board I think we all know that nothing is ever 100% safe and confidential on the WWW and I for one have never read anything that makes me think OMG they should never of said that because they will now be at risk of blah blah.... Unfortunately however there is nowhere else for us and there are some things that you do feel the need to ask questions about and the ONLY people you trust for that advice are those who have followed a similar path 

If we compair this site to another support site on the whole members are far more possitive and supportive without the judgement 

When I was a prospective adopter reading the post placement posts on "the other site" scared the life out of me!!! Do prospective adopters really need that?? Isnt it better to protect them slightly??

I am unsure who you were "protecting" us from by removing board but I think the only people I was ever worried about reading my posts were the childs sw and not because I was doing anything to put my child at risk but because this was an enviroment that I came to for support and not for judgement. My personality being as it is there was nothing that I ever said on here that I would not say to the sw's who worked with me but it did give me some confidence that posts were not being read and misinterpretted..... When we are struggling we often feel that it is forever and that we are the only ones to ever feel that way, the more experienced adopters know that this is a time that we will come out of and that so many of us face the same or similar.

Anyhow suggestions on how it could work...

I was wondering if maybe we could do something like BMP does where the approving sw/la/va can authorise the adopter? I am racking my brains to work out a way where this would not mean shed loads of work and so far the tiny brain cell I have left is not coming up with anything but that would help ensure that the dubious are kept out......

I was invited to this board and I think that most of us were and by that time I had regulary been posting parts of my journey. I think that should be enough but maybe I am being too simplistic


----------



## Mrs CW (Jul 12, 2004)

wynnster said:


> Tony Reid said:
> 
> 
> > That makes sense - and we do have alternative methods for stuff like that - like anonymous posting... Although we haven't used it on the public side of the website.
> ...


I don't think it would matter if you could work out who you are between you - but the benefit of anonymous posting is that it could enable you to remain anonymous to anyone reading your posts who turns out not to be genuine.

I think, and please tell me if I've got it wrong, I do understand what it is you want a private area for - that you need to be able to let off steam and discuss sensitive feelings about your children, your lives, etc when your children come home, how you feel about social services, worries you have post placement, and so on. The sorts of things you want to discuss are sensitive and private- talking about your experiences bonding with your children, challenging behaviours, and so on. And I completely understand why you only want to share that information with people you 'know'. But I think this gives us a problem for two reasons.

First of all, it comes down to the very issue that was raised in the first place with Bop. Who are your newest members and how do you know you can trust them? We already had criteria in place such as post count, length of time on FF, number of posts on the adoption boards and so on, and it was down to the volunteer to assess this before giving access. The very fact that members of the PP board did not necessarily trust this process has made the entire admin team think twice about how vulnerable you and the site are as a result of the things you post there and our inability to be completely sure.

Also, if the board is not to become a bit 'too private' - we have a dilemma for people joining FF for support at this time, having not been through the entire adoption process with us. How do you access that sort of support, and how do we know we can trust you?



keemjay said:


> its a shame that like everywhere else in this country FF has succumbed to the fear of legal redress..and i feel PP should not take the brunt of that fear


Sadly yes, there is fear of redress and unlike everywhere else, FF is run on a shoestring by individuals who are, at the end of the day, only volunteers. FF doesn't have the money, and Mel and Tony don't deserve, let alone have the resources, to ever be sued or dragged into legal wrangles over other people's families. 
Yes, the information you post is yours, but the legal implications of any issue involving a birth family or Social Services, are not something we can control. Ultimately we don't actually know most of you, so any disclaimers you make online, would doubtless not protect FF - or YOU - sufficiently. Sad, but true.

Those of you who have posted with me in the past on the tx areas of this site and who know me from the parenting boards, will know that I am a massive fan of this site, it has been my lifeline and so many other people's too over the years. I always try to help out in whatever way I can, and I'm flattered and happy that people trust me - and that I've made real friends (in real life I mean, not just online) through this site. However I am fairly sensitive about preserving some of my personal details - and I dont' have half the reasons to be, that adopting parents do. But several of you have in the past contacted me privately by PM or email, and I know roughly where some of you live, and some have sought me out on ** giving me your real names - I am flattered and pleased that you feel you can trust me, but really, you don't know me.

And yet, I think it's fair to say, the decisions made by the Volunteer about who may access the PP board, were not particularly trusted. You may have only asked a few innocent questions about them, but nevertheless that meant you weren't really trusting the decisions that had been made. When you weren't satisifed with the answers, some of you threatened to stop posting and were genuinely worried by the thought of what you had posted being available to someone you didn't trust the FF team to vet. I'm a bit surprised that this happened because you're now suggesting you'd prefer to post together on **, which is really no more safe. Probably the opposite. I guess what I'm saying is, if you genuinely feel so nervous about who may in the future join a private PP board, then really you are not safe anywhere and the only responsible thing for us to do on FF is to remove the opportunity for anyone to compromise themselves.

I realise the conversation has probably moved on in the time it's taken me to write this - and I need to go and have my dinner now so I'll press post.

C x


----------



## wynnster (Jun 6, 2003)

Mrs CW said:


> wynnster said:
> 
> 
> > Tony Reid said:
> ...


----------



## Caz (Jul 21, 2002)

Sorry to post right after Claire and bombard you with volunteers. I was typing as she was (but considerably slower it seems..  )



wynnster said:


> Tony - even in doing that there are so few of us really that we would 'know' who it is, or guess..... (depending on the issue of course) but things like baby, toddler, school age child etc we would just know and personally I still wouldn't feel safe posting - even anonymously.


To be honest, the only suggestion we could throw out for PP was as an anonymous only issues only area, so if you're saying anonymous is not adequate protection for you, that pretty much scuppers that idea.  I guess if others are open to it, we could set it up as a temp practice board so you could see what it looked like and see what you think? 

For the record I have been PMing Boggy to seek an adopter's view as well as Tony and Mel having experience. She said much the same as you about anonymity, Wynnster, for different reasons though. I have specifically asked her not to step in to the debate in this thread (as a volunteer anyway - she's entitled to do so as a member) because I did not want her to become a target for your resentment/frustration when she still needs your support as a member.

Sorry to go back a few pages; I did write this out earlier but had to step away and do stuff elsewhere so I've missed a page or two.



Anjelissa said:


> I do have one idea and it's just off the top of my head..........
> How about if within the rules there is a set amount of time as a member/number of posts accumulated etc (and a relatively long timespan as a member and high number of posts) on the general board before you are allowed access to PP? (even if this time/number of posts is kept confidential to FF admin).
> Most of us have been on FF for years through IVF and such like, or at the very least have contributed for a while on the general adoption chat thread through our assessment process prior to joining PP so are well and truly 'known'.


To be fair, that is what we had before; we just never published the rules for allowing entry...mostly because there were other variables we included and if we set "rules" like that then people can be, well, quite anal at sticking rigidly to them. IOW formalising and publishing them would tie our hands for either excluding anyone we felt we needed to (for whatever reason) or including those who perhaps do need it and are trustworthy but haven't hit an abritary post count/duration as agreed. That was why we were resistant to discussing what our inclusion criteria were when Bop was first approached about it. We've been talking around this for the best part of the week and not been able to come up with a way around this that doesn't lead to other potential problems.  I suspect we've talked it into the ground so maybe a fresh set of brains on it might help. 

The other issue with privacy is that, yes, we can restrict membership, but we can't restrict how members access the boards or what they do with information they learn here. What happens if someone inadvertently but indiscreetly speaks face to face to friends/family/SW etc. of another member sharing information that's only available in PP? What about if there's an argument and a rouge member, in resentment, shares personal information gleaned from that area outside of FF? How well do you really know a person or how they'll react until put in that position?  What about if you forget to log off and a friend/neighbour/relative "snoops" on your computer? What happens if someone you dislike guesses your password and logs on? What about if you access using an unsecured network and someone hijacks your connection? I'm not sayng any of those things will happen but, in theory, they _could_. We could ask you to agree not to do xyz, to limit risks but that, in itself, in practice, is pretty unenforceable.

One thing I'd like to ask - or ask you to think about. There's lots of talk about bringing PP back and general disgruntlement that it's gone but, frankly, we (management) have talked it to death... literally.  I do know though, fresh eyes/brains can bring new insight into a problem so we are open to suggestions. Firstly we need to know just what you need and whether we can provide that in the confines of FF. 
So for now, forget what PP was and think - if we could bring it back at all - what would it need to be? What is it that you want to get from a Post Placement board? What do you want to discuss / do with it? What could it give you that the Parenting After Adoption doesn't/can't give you? Some of you have posted some useful information we can look at on this but bear in mind what we've said about privacy - you'd have to assume information you share there (if it clearly identifies you or your children) should be no more than you would post in public areas of FF.

I should state, there's no promises being made here; we simply can't do that; but we can promise to listen to your needs and _try_ and address them.

C~x


----------



## Anthony Reid (Jan 1, 2002)

And to answer the medised question - its no longer appropriate to give it to 2 years olds.... they upped the age limit.

*/sorry - couldn't resist that


----------



## wynnster (Jun 6, 2003)

Caz said:


> To be fair, that is what we had before; we just never published the rules for allowing entry...mostly because there were other variables we included and if we set "rules" like that then people can be, well, quite anal at sticking rigidly to them. IOW formalising and publishing them would tie our hands for either excluding anyone we felt we needed to (for whatever reason) or including those who perhaps do need it and are trustworthy but haven't hit an abritary post count/duration as agreed. That was why we were resistant to discussing what our inclusion criteria were when Bop was first approached about it. We've been talking around this for the best part of the week and not been able to come up with a way around this that doesn't lead to other potential problems.  I suspect we've talked it into the ground so maybe a fresh set of brains on it might help.
> 
> C~x


I think this is where the issue is, we didn't know there was a criteria at all! All we saw was a private area where we felt 'secure' being told it wasn't public. Then new people came along, how these new people came along we did not know, did the m.o.d of the board just click a button to allow entry? 
Did anyone check into the new members background? Post counts? How long a member etc? We didn't know they did! Thats all we asked and wanted clarified. 
So really, all we needed was for a member of admin or whoever to say the above to us and all would have been fine (and still would be) but it is now Admin who have a whole new issue.

Caz - to be fair I think we've covered what we need and why we need it in previous posts


----------



## wynnster (Jun 6, 2003)

Tony Reid said:


> And to answer the medised question - its no longer appropriate to give it to 2 years olds.... they upped the age limit.
> 
> */sorry - couldn't resist that


  what age is it then Tony? Specifics please (so I can sue your  )


----------



## Anthony Reid (Jan 1, 2002)

Yes to all them questions Wynnster.


(as for medised I think its something like 6 years old now.)


Tony



ps. I'm not worried about you suing me - but I am worried about being stabbed in the  with a fork next time we run into each other at pizza hut


----------



## Mrs CW (Jul 12, 2004)

wynnster said:


> Mrs CW said:
> 
> 
> > Those of you who have posted with me in the past on the tx areas of this site and who know me from the parenting boards, will know that I am a massive fan of this site, it has been my lifeline and so many other people's too over the years. I always try to help out in whatever way I can, and I'm flattered and happy that people trust me - and that I've made real friends (in real life I mean, not just online) through this site. However I am fairly sensitive about preserving some of my personal details - and I dont' have half the reasons to be, that adopting parents do. But several of you have in the past contacted me privately by PM or email, and I know roughly where some of you live, and some have sought me out on ** giving me your real names - I am flattered and pleased that you feel you can trust me, but really, you don't know me. And vice versa - Are any of us safe when we post anything online? But again, its about trust, we don't know you no But i know you have been here for some time I know your childrens names are Matthew and Sadie, I know your son has toiletting issues, I know your husband had children before you got together and a few more things too.
> > I am one of the people that have spoken to you and sort your advice on issues previously, however, if anything came from this advice, couldn't I sue FF??


I was attempting to address your concerns about posting in a_ private_ area - what details we choose to post on a public board is up to us. But the implications of FF running a specifically 'private' board are quite different - we have to be able to guarantee that it really is for genuine people. It was the very issue that you originally raised. I have given a certain level of information about myself and my children on the very specific part of the site that I post on. I have taken a calculated risk that no one is going to seek me out on FF or going to find me and use the information I give out for their own ends, in the midst of all the stuff people can wade through on the internet. It's a likelihood I've considered and decided on for myself. 
You don't know exactly who I am, even if I share names and issues. I don't live under the same restrictions for sharing information that some PP posters do. I'm not ** friends with you, you've never asked me to be, I don't know your real name or what region you live in, or anything else about you except parenting issues you've shared, like I have. I think you know the point I was making. 


wynnster said:


> Mrs CW said:
> 
> 
> > I guess what I'm saying is, if you genuinely feel so nervous about who may in the future join a private PP board, then really you are not safe anywhere and the only responsible thing for us to do on FF is to remove the opportunity for anyone to compromise themselves. So, because my son is adopted I cannot seek support on FF? Or I can but only publicly...... Ok so If I want to post that my daughter Eve who is 6 and came to us on 4th April 2008 on the public boards thats ok and doesn't hold FF with any legal problems then?


Of course you can seek support on FF. And you do, and I hope we do our best to give it. No, it doesn't give us quite the same legal problems (within reason - which is why we have volunteers, as you know) - not if you choose to provide information about yourself or your family knowing that the site can be viewed by members of the public. The implications of managing a private part of the site are completely different as it can and does affect what information you choose to share - as you know when you felt it best to delete some of your posts from the PP area.


----------



## ~ Chux ~ (Apr 8, 2003)

wynnster said:


> I think this is where the issue is, we didn't know there was a criteria at all!


Having just looked through the stickies within Post Placement, there is one from Bop stating the following......



> We do try to ensure that this board is secure and help members feel more comfortable posting on it. To help with this, we have criteria for giving access to new members........The list of those with access is also reviewed on a regular basis and membership may be withdrawn from those who no longer post on it...





wynnster said:


> So, because my son is adopted I cannot seek support on FF? Or I can but only publicly...... Ok so If I want to post that my daughter Eve who is 6 and came to us on 4th April 2008 on the public boards thats ok and doesn't hold FF with any legal problems then?


The difference is that you would be posting on a public board that you KNOW is public and can be read by anyone, not somewhere that you are assuming is "safe" because it is restricted. If there is comeback because of something you have posted on an open forum then that is down to you as you put it there.

Chux


----------



## Caz (Jul 21, 2002)

wynnster said:


> Thats fine, if we only post once, if we want to post daily?? We're all anonymous? How do we know who we are talking to in a conversation??


Well if you're dealing with specific issues (which is what posts here indicate is the reason for wanting to keep Post Placement) you're unlikely to be getting into a lot of chit chat so it's be one or two posts per person per thread, not daily responses. Or are you saying you want a daily chat thread on PP? Surely that's something you can do just as easily in the public area? 
If it was necessary we could work out a way to differentiate who posts what without giving yourself away (just Person A, person B etc.) And we do have a facility for the first post (the person who raises the issue) to post anonymously and subsequent posts to be identifiable (although that identifies you as the OP by default I suppose).



> How do you know who can become a volunteer? A new member joins and wants to become a Volunteer straight away, why can't they? There is still a Parenting adopted children board for general one off questions.


Not particularly relevant to this thread or to anyone other than the management team (since it's our job to to that), but things have moved on significantly since you were (or even I became) a volunteer. We have our own joining criteria, interviews, training etc. We don't just promote anyone who sticks their hand up and offers. 



> Doesn't that go for every piece of advice offered on FF?? Not just on the adoption board but every other board? How much medised to give my two year old etc?


No. Those boards are fully public and covered by: http://www.fertilityfriends.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=186&Itemid=57 
The issue with Post Placement becomes an issue because it's controlled and vetted membership and by giving members access, we accept responsibility for validating them and controlling content there. If we handed it over to you (the members) to vet, would you accept the responsibility knowing you could be personally sued if things went wrong?



> I am one of the people that have spoken to you and sort your advice on issues previously, however, if anything came from this advice, couldn't I sue FF??


No, see link above.



> We have to go somewhere if we're forced out by ff - where do you suggest?


What you do off of FF is your concern. I believe Claire was simply pointing out that you're happy to share far more personal information with each other on ******** than you are here but it's here you're making the issue of it. Or are you now saying it's not such an issue for you all? Sorry, but you opened that can of worms and I'm afraid we have been dealing with the legal implications it's raised and this is why the board was closed.



> So, because my son is adopted I cannot seek support on FF? Or I can but only publicly...... Ok so If I want to post that my daughter Eve who is 6 and came to us on 4th April 2008 on the public boards thats ok and doesn't hold FF with any legal problems then?


What you post publicly you are liable for. See legal link above. 



wynnster said:


> I think this is where the issue is, we didn't know there was a criteria at all! All we saw was a private area where we felt 'secure' being told it wasn't public.


And you had it explained to over a week ago that we do check and vet people and exactly why we don't make the criteria public, we asked you to trust us and to trust your volunteer to manage it and you couldn't do that. I've explained it again why we don't want to actively publish a criteria for joining, and I wonder why, if you have so little trust of us, you're fighting so hard for something that you can't be sure we're going to manage appropriately?



> Then new people came along, how these new people came along we did not know, did the m.o.d of the board just click a button to allow entry?


When you say "we did not know them" don't you mean you? Bop certainly knew them and so did I. We did the research and she'd interacted with both in the public areas so you're not speaking for everyone there. Frankly it's just rude to to talk about those members in public where they can read this so let's stop this part of the debate right here.



> Did anyone check into the new members background? Post counts? How long a member etc? We didn't know they did! Thats all we asked and wanted clarified.
> So really, all we needed was for a member of admin or whoever to say the above to us and all would have been fine (and still would be) but it is now Admin who have a whole new issue.


 Do you honestly think we don't? That we just randomly approve members to the area without checking?  Again this just all comes down to trust. You simply don't trust us to check. We assured you we did and do, still you don't trust it. Not sure what else there is to discuss on that really; we're going round in circles.



> Caz - to be fair I think we've covered what we need and why we need it in previous posts


And to be fair, we told you long before this thread started that we have very robust checks in place; they more than meet all the suggested "criteria" here. We have things we can check that you can't see as members. Not really sure what other assurances you want from us on that and, frankly, the whole thing is a bit moot now anyway.

This is really just turning into an exercise at criticising each other now and that's not really helping solve the issue at the heart of the matter. At this point we've said we want you to work with us to find a solution. We're not going to let this dialogue go on forever so we'll give it another 48 hours (and a little bit due to the lateness of the hour) for solutions/suggestions and then close the debate one way or another. I really do genuinely hope we can reach a resolution that - if not exactly what you want - is a reasonable compromise. I think I speak for the whole team when I say none of us wanted it to come to closure and we all fought quite hard to find a solution.

C~x


----------



## keemjay (Jan 19, 2004)

sorry had to go to bed last night so couldnt join in..havent time to get my head round this at the mo but just have to add in that the reason i questioned the 'criteria' in the first place was that at the top of the list of posters was someone who hadnt posted since 2009!!! that gave me EVERY reason to raise the issue..and that became a issue of being told 'we dont 'trust' the management'. How on earth can i trust that the list is being monitored if that sort of thing happens..ok it was found that list was out of date, but thats WHY the issue first came up..but by the then the daggers were drawn and here we are now.

kj


----------



## Old Timer (Jan 23, 2005)

I was out yesterday and didn't have the energy last night to log on so have come across this now and have a stinking headache from reading the whole post   
I am really disappointed that the one area we felt able to be honest about what its really like to parent adopted children, to ask for advise and support from others who know what its like and to discuss sensitive issues is being removed.  None of the regular posters are stupid or niave enough to think that it was a completely safe area, we were still cautious, we didn't use names or give people our addresses or anyt real identifying information.  I am not friends on ** with any one from here simply because we live every day with big security issues thanks to Social Services, I can't afford to put my family at risk.  Very few people on there know my real name, the ones that do I have 'chatted' to for a long time, many of us went through the process together and you get to know who are genuin as a result.  
Prospective adopters and people at first stages do not want to read of our worries, as CC has said the other Board has put a lot of people off and though they may be having those big issues the majority that post there have very damaged children, whereas we generally tend to have adopted young toddlers who, for the time being, are doing incredibly well on the main.
I don't have an answer to how best to give us what we want, all I know is there is a real need for this private area and without it I won't be posting on FF.  I come here to read and post about my 'friends' on PP, we are a little community, and I go to the main Adoption board before login out to see if I can offer advice BUT I don't get support from the main board so have no need to really visit there anymore   
For what its worth, I think this has gotten totally out of hand - a simple question was asked about a VERY out of date list and because of that we lose our area of support...........Its not about trust of the 'Management', its simply a need to know that things are being checked and kept up to date which its possible things were being but the list just hadn't been amended and all that would have needed was a reply sayng 'Opps, sorry, yes that person doens't have access but we forgot to update the list - will do it now'
OT


----------



## ritzi (Feb 18, 2006)

new to the debate.........

i stopped posting on the main FF threads a while ago when my clinic decided to find me and start printing off my posts. 
i felt my children had been exposed as they had attended clinic with me and so the staff realised who i was quite quickly despite my ff name not being my real name, my children's pictures not being my avatar etc. i was found simply by posting on the named clinic thread   

i have continued to post on the post placement board - sadly at a much lesser rate due to the experience of the clinic finding me. 

but - post placement thread was where i felt safe as i trusted that people were ff members prior to being on the board. i have not found anything to make me nervous. while i do not post often now i know i can always ask a question or vent about the difficulties of parenting an adopted child. 

i also have access to the post-natal depression board which is a private one - is this staying? 

i do not have a ******** account so have now lost my support system. 

ritz


----------



## Mrs CW (Jul 12, 2004)

keemjay said:


> sorry had to go to bed last night so couldnt join in..havent time to get my head round this at the mo but just have to add in that the reason i questioned the 'criteria' in the first place was that at the top of the list of posters was someone who hadnt posted since 2009!!! that gave me EVERY reason to raise the issue..and that became a issue of being told 'we dont 'trust' the management'. How on earth can i trust that the list is being monitored if that sort of thing happens..ok it was found that list was out of date, but thats WHY the issue first came up..but by the then the daggers were drawn and here we are now.
> 
> kj


KJ 
There would never be a problem with any member raising a concern about the membership list, nor an individual member you are not comfortable with. We understand that your privacy is a very sensitive issue. It was the fact that Bop sought to give you reassurances that no one was given access without a proper process (which should not be published in order to retain its integrity) and these were met with more suspicion and her judgement was questioned. Overall this has shown that yes, site management decisions about the boards, membership and how to safeguard your information, rightly or wrongly, are not really trusted. Cue requests to delete posts because of the information within them. This has in turn raised the issue for the admin team, that FF could probably never get this right, such that you wouldn't ever be safe enough to be off your guard completely, which is what a private area would imply to most people using it.

I think I lost a sentence in my earlier post where I said how much I feel this site is a great support to everyone - what I missed out, was to say that I strongly believe it should try its utmost to support all of us, whatever reason has brought us to the site. I try to provide help to all parents on the boards I moderate, but I am conscious that my experience of parenting, other than the practicalities we all tend to discuss, and the fact that we have come to be parents after alot of heartache, is nothing like yours, yet I hope we have a good enough relationship as fellow parents to talk about many things. I know it doesn't cover everything for you and nor does parenting after adoption. When it comes to the post placement issues, I am upset if we can't give precisely the right support to every circumstance. There have been other occasions where we've had to say no to a certain type of board, or a particular topic area because it could leave the site or its members vulnerable. I for one do not like the fact that the PP board will no longer be available, and I don't believe any others in the admin team are happy that it's going, but after massive and detailed debate the implications of this particular 'private' board are too serious for us to ignore.

I really hope that there's a way in which you can all find the means to chat, make friends and gain each others' trust on the public parts of the adoption boards, and we can still try to find a way that you can raise more private matters to each other_ within the context of a public site, at your own risk -_ perhaps by posting that you have a certain issue and would others with experience to share invite you to PM them, or, by using the ability to create an anonymous post purely to discuss the more sensitive aspects. In fact both these could potentially help open up the facility to much newer members who have joined later in the adoption process. You'd just need to be on your guard about what you would share about your own families, but there wouldn't be too much stopping you from providing invaluable experience and support to everyone.

I've enjoyed being with you and others here on the parenting boards over the years.

Claire x


----------



## wynnster (Jun 6, 2003)

Caz said:


> The issue with Post Placement becomes an issue because it's controlled and vetted membership and by giving members access, we accept responsibility for validating them and controlling content there. If we handed it over to you (the members) to vet, would you accept the responsibility knowing you could be personally sued if things went wrong?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Debs (Mar 22, 2002)

Wynster - ive read your post and as requested moved it now read  

I have moved it into the admin area so those who havent read it can  

Debs x


----------



## wynnster (Jun 6, 2003)

Debs said:


> Wynster - ive read your post and as requested moved it now read
> 
> I have moved it into the admin area so those who havent read it can
> 
> Debs x


Thankyou x


----------



## keemjay (Jan 19, 2004)

gawd its like a private investigation..he said/ she said..with us being without defence cos you can see the thread under question and we cant anymore  

as i see it..
the long and short of it is that FF cannot open themselves to being legally challenged IF by some remote chance 'something' happened..which would be someone infiltrating and psoing a risk to a child... personally i think the chances of that are extreeeeemly slim..IF we were careful and vetted those who entered..and therein lies the problem..because 

1.we cant really let in anyone 'at point of need' (ie a new FF member) and that goes against FF policy..and
2.it seems to be that admin/management are saying the members themsleves would have no access to what the criteria are and who is in charge of it/checking it..which i dont think is fair to those who post there

I do trust the management..when they are open and honest about the criteria..i dont really undertsand the problem in letting us understand the system   

kj x


----------



## Caz (Jul 21, 2002)

Sorry Wynnster, quoting within quoting is confusing me  so I'm just copying and pasting...



> So why can't we go back to how it was before now we know the 'rules' for access and are more aware of the implications that would be on ff?


For legal reasons. You being "more aware" does not absolve us of legal responsibility should it come to that. You've opened the can of worms, now we have to deal with the fall out. (I am getting a sense of deja vu here!  )



> Just caught up with the other replies from this morning and I read from Claires reply that the decision has been made and that we can still post on the public board....... we can not do that. Read Ritzi's post. Unless you are an adoptive parent you have no idea why we cannot, I know you're trying to but you cannot possibly begin to imagine how important this area (that you're taking from us) is. Can you ask Suzie and Boggy for their input here?


Boggy is well aware of this debate and free to voice her opinions if she wants to. Suzie is entirely free to comment too, if she wants to.

I'm not going to address your other points since the are merely a post mortem on what was / has happened and not moving the discussion forward at all. I think for now we (management) will stick to answering questions about procedure /legal or moral implications or technical rather than get into whys and wherefores of what happened. End of the day, you can't have Post Placement back exactly as was so no point keep asking.



keemjay said:


> the long and short of it is that FF cannot open themselves to being legally challenged IF by some remote chance 'something' happened..which would be someone infiltrating and psoing a risk to a child...


Yes, essentially that's it. 
The problem with having any kind of system where we physically check members for access is that because it's a manual process, we become liable. Ironically, publishing vetting criteria makes us more liable since we're actively saying who we allow (and thus making it easier for people to see what the need to do to get access) and also if we make a mistake (and I think, via the issue with the list - you've all pointed out quite vocally that there's an element of human error involved in any manual system) we are liable for that. 
If we employed some kind of automated system - like the relationships board where you need to be a member _and_ have a minimum post count before it automatically becomes available to you - then we would not be any more liable than if it were public as we have no direct control over you a: joining the site and b: posting enough posts to gain access. The problem with that is it would then be available to every member on the site who fitted that criteria, not just adopters. If we set it to, say, Senior Members and above (which you get at 160 posts), that would be about 4000 members, just under 3000 of whom have posted on FF in the last 8 months. There'd still be a huge need for discretion.

So the one thing we can't have is any kind of manual vetting system.



> personally i think the chances of that are extremely slim..


You're probably right but it's not your (or my) house on the line if it happens. I think the thing that's been forgotten in all this is that FF is a privately run and owned website. None of us - except the site owner - really have ultimate say on how it should be run/laid out.



> IF we were careful and vetted those who entered..and therein lies the problem..because
> 
> 1.we cant really let in anyone 'at point of need' (ie a new FF member) and that goes against FF policy..and
> 2.it seems to be that admin/management are saying the members themsleves would have no access to what the criteria are and who is in charge of it/checking it..which i dont think is fair to those who post there
> ...


Essentially, yes, what you are saying is right - for reasons see above. 

Any more constructive suggestions for a way forward?

C~x


----------



## coxy (Aug 4, 2005)

Have no ideas but just wanted to back up what the girls have said, mainly Old Timer and Ritzi. The PP has been invaluable to me as you know you can chat to other people in the same situation going through exactly the same thing. If i had been a prospective adopter i wouldnt have wanted to read the stuff that was on PP as it would have put me off/made me think twice, which is why i thought it was designed especially for people who had been approved and had a child placed with them. I do not and will not be posting on the general adoption site as frankly i wont get the support that i need from what i see as a group of strangers (sorry if that offends anyone).

Coxy


----------



## wynnster (Jun 6, 2003)

Can I ask who set the board up and why? Why wasn't the legal problems applying then?

I get a sense of them and us, it's ridiculous, we're asking for support and you cannot provide that - How can we suggest anything if we've been told we can't have it?


----------



## Dame Edna (May 17, 2007)

Hi

I do hope that the PP board does not disappear as it is virtually the only board I post on. 

I have been off line for the last couple of days but have read 'most' of this thread.  I have a suggestion ..

Could access only be granted once Tony and Mel have received a copy of an adoption certificate (posted to them via recorded delivery).

Personally, my main concern is that access is not achieved by someone who is not a genuine adopter and this gets round this issue.  In my opinion, it would also get round the issue of having to post by a certain date and because we would all be 'confirmed' adopters there would be no reason to have to 'delete' previous posts ...

If the copy of the certificate is viewed by Tony only, I think this would work.  There would be no need for other 'admin' or 'management' to view this sensitive info but Tony could advise 'management'/'admin that an adoption cert has been received and access could then be granted

Any thoughts .... ?

DE X
PS. Wynn, do not blame yourself.  If PP was taken off line so readily then it was clearly not just down to you ....


----------



## Mel (Jan 1, 2002)

Obviously as we are going through the adoption process i have read this debate with interest......................

As i see it, you can have a board, Tony did say you could earlier in this thread but we needed some constructive ideas about how to better manage the situation so we do not end up in this predicament again, that is all he asked

This seems to have got into a bit of lets blame Admin for something and everything, this was not initially down to us, we simply responded to what was asked and the way forward was to close that board as it had information on that needed to be deleted and Tony does not have hours on end to go through everybody's posts and it would of also meant deleting a lot of others posts, it was too complicated a task.

We do not have time to go into legalities but rest assured we have all of your interests at heart, not just our own, unfortunately internet law is a minefield and it has become very much 'lets sue anybody and everybody' scenario.

Can we just get on with the new PP board and think of a reasonable way forward where new adoptive parents are welcome.

Please can we now stop shooting every Admin that answers your questions with a solid answer and that means me too and get on with ideas, if we do not reach any and keep instead toing (sp) and frowing (sp) we will never reach that conclusion and your board will take longer to re-open or not re-open at all at this rate.

Please ..............

Many Thanks x


----------



## Dame Edna (May 17, 2007)

So Mel, what about my suggestion


----------



## Anthony Reid (Jan 1, 2002)

Dame Edna said:


> So Mel, what about my suggestion


Unfortunately its not realistic Dame Edna, given data protection issues.

I think the only way forward is for myself or mel to manage the board directly - and make a judgement call on each application...if people do not trust our decisions made then that would mean we would just close the board. However, looking at another thread in here it seems that the board is no longer going to be required anyway.

So not sure what to do really.


----------



## CAREbear1 (May 15, 2005)

Oh rats- don't want to enter a debate, but thought Dame Edna had put forward a good suggestion   I would have certainly been willing to post one off to you- and I do know first hand some of the security issues that one can come across as a result of our path to parenthood   . Tony, why does it give data protection issues (I don't understand data protection, so words of one syllable   ). It is a minefield.
Thanks
Carebear


----------



## CAREbear1 (May 15, 2005)

Is it possible to send private PMs to more than one person? So people that had a question of sensitive nature could send a Pm to the group of people they knew had been on PP?


----------



## Anthony Reid (Jan 1, 2002)

Well, the proper answer would be that "Sending us adoption certificates would involve us becoming a 'data controller' of what could be deemed sensitive data. "

But essentially we would not want to manually handle data like that. Its outside of what FF does.


----------



## Anthony Reid (Jan 1, 2002)

CAREbear1 said:


> Is it possible to send private PMs to more than one person? So people that had a question of sensitive nature could send a Pm to the group of people they knew had been on PP?


Yep


----------



## CAREbear1 (May 15, 2005)

Right fair enough Tony. (and I understood it too- yay!) Thanks


----------



## wynnster (Jun 6, 2003)

Tony Reid said:


> I think the only way forward is for myself or mel to manage the board directly - and make a judgement call on each application...if people do not trust our decisions made then that would mean we would just close the board.


Perfect solution! As I have said to Mel many a time, she should join us (and you of course, if you like...) I think this is a great idea, but as long as you don't mind, of course.


----------



## crusoe (Jun 3, 2005)

OMG - What on earth is going on here? 
I have just read back through this thread and my head is spinning. I will be really sad to see the PP board go, I don't post on it often (didn't know it existed until quite recently) but knowing it is there and that I can tap into the support other adoptive parents can offer is a great comfort. Just being around people who "get it" is invaluable and will be really missed. I fully support what Coxy, Ritzi, Old timer and a few others have posted - they are much more eloquent than me.
So much of the problem seems to be about trust - frankly I don't trust the PP board anymore than I trust a public one. It is my personal responsibilty to be mindful and careful about what I post - I have the identity of an adopted child to protect as well as my own. What I value about the PP board is that I will only get replies from those who have walked in my shoes so to speak. Replies from fellow adopters who understand issues of attachment, trauma and loss that most non-adopters just don't have to deal with.

Crusoe xxx


----------



## Anthony Reid (Jan 1, 2002)

Mel and I have decided to manage applications to the board and have reinstated a clean board.

I am going to lock this thread now.


----------

