Sub-I nonsense

[dispo]

To the OP coordinator, thanks for the response. I too would be very interested in hearing your thoughts on certain issues, even if it has to be generic/vague so as not to give yourself away. It would be nice to know that at least some pieces of info are for sure coming from a legit source!

[socrates]

(05-15-2017, 03:02 PM)Guest Wrote:

(05-15-2017, 02:45 PM)socrates Wrote:

(05-15-2017, 02:32 PM)Guest Wrote:

(05-15-2017, 01:23 AM)dispo Wrote: Honest question here, and others can feel free to chime in since the previous poster was a guest, but: Why would a coordinator bother coming to this forum? It's largely anonymous, so you can't weed out the truly awful posters. Much of it seems to be trolling by what I can only imagine are M1s who just haven't gotten knocked down a peg yet. I appreciate that they're here and contribute; I just wish I knew when a post was from a legit source vs. trolling/ignorance. You can only take so many grains of salt before everything starts tasting the same.

Original coordinator here.  My reasonings:

1) I like to get a feel for what neurosurg applicants and future/past sub-i's are generally freaking out about, knowing full well this is just a subset of the most extreme examples.  Usually it's all nonsense, but sometimes when assumptions are way off it can be an interesting excercise in trying to figure out why that might be.   

2) While I would never post misleading comments talking up my program, obviously I want to hear the impressions and/or gossip.  I highly doubt there's a lot of PA's posing as residents or sub-I's to make their programs look good because believe it or not we really do have better and more important things to do, but who knows - I'm currently here. 

3) Pure voyeurism - ya'll are nuts.

Now, as to what motivated me to respond to this particular post.  Like the very, very few posts I've responded to in the past, it generally has a lot to do with transparancy in the sub-i/match process.  I've worked with med students in different capacities for quite a while time, and you're more often than not your own worst enemies.  The match is stressfully and painfully ambiguous for both applicants and PD's, and I think we're all better off without some of the rampant misconceptions or rumours that bubble up. I know true transparency is nigh impossible, but if we can cut through some of more unnecessary bullshit, both programs and applicants can make better informed decisions.     

I would be happy to weigh in or answer questions in a more legit manner ala Reddit AMA's, but then again I can only speak confidently for my program or in very general terms, and given that remaining truly anonymous would probably be difficult.

Thank you for your candor.  We appreciate your insight.

Id be happy to set up an anonymous AMA if you'd like.

No problem.  I'll consider it - but like I said, because some things are so program dependent, true anonymity might be hard.  However, I'll consider some alternatives too; maybe pre-screened questions that can be shopped to multiple PA's?  There's a pre-SNS PA meeting this week so maybe I can brainstorm with a few others.

This is true, program dependent variations may be difficult to keep someone from identifying you.  In any case, you could make an anonymous gmail/hotmail/yahoo email account and send a message to admin@neurosurgeryhub.com or neurosurgeryhub@gmail.com  We can discuss off-line and set up an account etc.  I like the idea of perhaps bringing other PAs perspective in as well.  Thanks again.