I’m wanting to refer those in my organisation to these sites to contribute to the discussion, but I’m not sure which one to refer them to. Should we be thinking of merging the two forums (or “fora”) together, and have the Informatics/CILN section under the healthform site? Informatics is going to impact on everyone in healthcare (if it doesn’t already) so we could get some useful synergies there.
@NathanK may be able to offer some suggestions on how this could work?
#nz-forum (ie CiLN) is best for content aimed at clinical informaticians and to a lesser extend health informaticians, such as a highly technical and operational stuff regarding telehealth
healthforum.nz is best for content aimed more broadly, such as “how to use telehealth in your practice”
The key problem here is that there is significant overlap in some Topics, and having a hard silo between forums (or is that fora?) is very unhelpful. An associated problem is that we don’t currently have a formal way for non-clinical health informaticians to join in. We currently have 110 members in @nz-dig-leaders, and they make valuable contributions to our discussions, but this is an informal arrangement.
From my somewhat biased perspective, the obvious solution for this (and several other issues) is for us to move #nz-forum (and thus @nz-ciln) from discourse.digitalhealth.net (which we have been kindly gifted by our UK colleagues) to healthforum.nz (which is funded by HiNZ).
What do others (especially @nz-ciln-advisory) think?
I have mentioned this before (great conversation btw) and had a quick chat with Nathan about it.
I think the different closed and segregated places/forums are necessary to drive different conversations from different audiences, but I also think that there has to be a more “open” discussion about things that foster innovation -or require it, for that matter- as sometimes it comes from places unrelated to the epicentre of an industry.
As I mentioned before, I’d be happy to help; but I DO see @NathanK’s point around how it is a delicate matter
Also, a nightmare to coordinate if we need people to just curate content and discussions that are deemed to be in the “public” forums.
My original idea, to have a public-facing CMS where some of these discussions could be made available (at least for people to read) might be a way to go; in that case, people like you, @damon could refer your co-workers to the reading material and discuss later (unless I understand the whole thing wrong).
We would need commitment and content creation/curation I think.
Just thinking out loud… sorry for the verbal vomit
From a user perspective, with crude understandings of the inter-fora technicalities, what if most NZ discussion, including #nz-forum, were moved to healthforum.nz, but that those with cross-national interests be the NZ ambassadors on discourse.digitalhealth.net . . .this group, which perhaps would have significant membership from @nz-ciln-advisory, could form their own group on healthforum.nz, if they wanted, for discussions about what discussions from discourse.digitalhealth.net might need to be brought to the attention of healthforum.nz groups/cross-posted and what brought of healthforum.nz to an international audience? In this scenario, #nz-forum would need to clearly state the purpose of the discourse.digitalhealth.net forum (e.g., international collaboration/innovation), and point new members towards healthforum.nz . . . This approach makes sense to me, anyway Best of both fora
Best of both fora