|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
#28697 - 15/03/08 12:46 PM
Re: The VRCT Website
[Re: Paul Latham]
|
Geoff Hannis
Hero
Registered: 12/02/04
Posts: 3026
Loc: the path less trodden
|
And I second Paul's sentiments, in all respects! 
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#28698 - 15/03/08 12:59 PM
Re: The VRCT Website
[Re: Paul Latham]
|
Graham Roberts
Expert
Registered: 17/12/03
Posts: 128
Loc: Borders General Hospital
|
I have to agree with Paul here.
Since I have been registered, Richard appears to have given a lot of help and factual advice to readers of the website. Ok sometimes his input and explanations can be a bit long, but his posts usually contain lots of factual info as well as his personal opinions and we are all entitled to them.
If the posts were based on quality I'm sure he would be near or at the top of the ratings.
I really hope that Richard reconsiders as I'm sure that the quality of his posts will be sorely missed.
Graham
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#28701 - 15/03/08 05:55 PM
Re: The VRCT Website
[Re: Graham Roberts]
|
Huw
Hero
Registered: 20/06/00
Posts: 1390
Loc: Essex
|
Gentlemen, I did ask Richard to reconsider before removing his membership.
I also consider his input as extremely important.
He declined and asked me to remove all his details.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#28722 - 17/03/08 10:00 AM
Re: The VRCT Website
[Re: Paul Latham]
|
Lee S
Master
Registered: 17/09/06
Posts: 205
Loc: Hereford
|
I also think Richard's input will be missed.
Lee
_________________________
Don't forget "we've never had it so good".
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#28875 - 28/03/08 05:13 PM
Re: The VRCT Website
[Re: Topper]
|
biomedbill
Savant
Registered: 22/07/05
Posts: 121
Loc: south yorkshire
|
Well you can’t turn your back for three weeks without all hell breaking loose? Looks like I missed all the fun.
It’s nice to see the VRCT going public after all this time. Now we know what we are dealing with. Still can’t find anything on their website to change my mind. All of the old concerns are still there: it is still Medical Physics-centric, lumps us in with non engineering clinical staff, does not facilitate different grades or responsibilities, will cause recruitment problems due to restrictive entry requirements, will create a “glass ceiling” restricting the salaries of senior engineers and managers and of course is totally irrelevant to non NHS engineers/ technicians.
I hope RJL is ok, I noticed that his last post was in the wee small hours. I must admit that he could be pretty acerbic if his views differed from your own but he and others should know when to draw a line under an argument and agree to differ. It is virtually (no pun intended) impossible to have a proper argument on an internet forum.
By the way we have: 1 ex-RAF tech, 2 ex-mining engineers (electrical), 1 ex-post office engineer and 1 ex-TV repairman amongst our staff. We have 1 who came through the MPPM training course in the 80's. Most of us were trained in house and as far as I know we haven't killed anyone yet.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#28876 - 28/03/08 05:29 PM
Re: The VRCT Website
[Re: biomedbill]
|
Geoff Hannis
Hero
Registered: 12/02/04
Posts: 3026
Loc: the path less trodden
|
Hey Bill ... where have you been? 
There are are a lot of ex-RAF types about, plenty of ex-TV blokes too (usually very good at electronics). But MPPM? I thought I knew them all! What's that one, then?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#28897 - 29/03/08 04:43 PM
Re: The VRCT Website
[Re: Geoff Hannis]
|
biomedbill
Savant
Registered: 22/07/05
Posts: 121
Loc: south yorkshire
|
Hi, Geoff
Just been sunning myself on "typical Canarian" beach and a bit of DIY, using up my annual leave.
As for MPPM, it was the Medical Physics and Physiological Measurement training course at ONC and HNC levels. Most of the students went on to work in ECG and PFU, who now are going through the registration process to be called Clinical Physiologists. MPPM was the VRCT of its day, it didn't work then and won't work now. The MPPM courses only lasted a few years due to lack of interest, I feel that the CT courses being developed now will suffer the same fate, not enough students to make it viable unless they are prepared to travel great distances.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
48 registered
(shareef, Ceramic Mike, SUZUKI, Kanku, IT, Kawasaki, Apollo11, Chris Watts, Huw, Jonathan Wells, Minitech, Dom Nicosia, Dicky, DanKel, John Carpenter, Eddie, Panander, Morse, merazoo1, David R, Martin Henley, Eagle, Mark.E, Graham Roberts, John Stewart, Baldrick, 1 invisible)
and 460 anonymous users online.
|
|
|
