After noting the following reply to Sam at bottom of this blog:http://www.emrandhipaa.com/emr-and-hipa ... s-it-cost/
Would like to re-bump the following suggestion above:
"I also think the Open Source? content should be a succinct and concise page that simply tries to convince users (especially physicians) why an open source emr is better than a proprietary one (after providing a straightforward definition of open source). This is a huge hurdle in OpenEMR acceptance and this page/link is a nice way to attack that issue head on. I think Jack may be working on writing content for a page like this."
Rather than overload that 'Open Source?' link with a bunch of links/articles/text, suggest placing a well crafted, brief, concise page to do the following:
1. Define open source
2. State several very successful open source projects in other areas and the common open source principles that made them successful (this may not be useful if distracts from the main point 3. below)
3. State why open source is better for emr
These are just my initial thoughts, and practically speaking, when you start writing you may go in another direction, just suggest keeping in mind the target audience (the physician not educated in open source EMR's).
Once you have this well crafted page, you can then begin to place this link in the blogs when you run into posters such as Sam has in the above blog link.