How is this allowed?

[Guest]

(10-23-2021, 09:12 PM)Focus Wrote: Please discuss the situation and not the person.

What? The situation IS the person. One specific person who is cheating the system this cycle. Yes, this person and all others who break the rules should be called out, especially if they brag about it publicly. The majority of applicants are playing by the rules.

[Focus]

(10-24-2021, 08:29 AM)Guest Wrote:

(10-23-2021, 09:12 PM)Focus Wrote: Please discuss the situation and not the person.

What? The situation IS the person. One specific person who is cheating the system this cycle. Yes, this person and all others who break the rules should be called out, especially if they brag about it publicly. The majority of applicants are playing by the rules.

So report her, no need for people to talk shit about her, particularly regarding her gender.  Bear in mind you may not be seeing all posts on this topic.

[Guest]

(10-24-2021, 01:35 PM)Focus Wrote:

(10-24-2021, 08:29 AM)Guest Wrote:

(10-23-2021, 09:12 PM)Focus Wrote: Please discuss the situation and not the person.

What? The situation IS the person. One specific person who is cheating the system this cycle. Yes, this person and all others who break the rules should be called out, especially if they brag about it publicly. The majority of applicants are playing by the rules.

So report her, no need for people to talk shit about her, particularly regarding her gender.  Bear in mind you may not be seeing all posts on this topic.

I think there is valid discussion on the situation without the individual. Again, she couldn’t do this without her home program approving it. It’s not just the individual it becomes a systems issue. And in the bigger picture an issue on the operative authority of SNS vs individual programs.

(Ex. SNS guidelines on when Sub-I applications could be accepted, there was no uniformity in how it was handled. Some home institutions would not approve VSAS apps until April 15th while others did and some applicants were told spaces were full by the time their apps were allowed to go out.

[Guest]

First rule of the game: rules are for losers

[Guest]

(10-24-2021, 07:23 PM)Guest Wrote:

(10-24-2021, 01:35 PM)Focus Wrote:

(10-24-2021, 08:29 AM)Guest Wrote:

(10-23-2021, 09:12 PM)Focus Wrote: Please discuss the situation and not the person.

What? The situation IS the person. One specific person who is cheating the system this cycle. Yes, this person and all others who break the rules should be called out, especially if they brag about it publicly. The majority of applicants are playing by the rules.

So report her, no need for people to talk shit about her, particularly regarding her gender.  Bear in mind you may not be seeing all posts on this topic.

I think there is valid discussion on the situation without the individual. Again, she couldn’t do this without her home program approving it. It’s not just the individual it becomes a systems issue. And in the bigger picture an issue on the operative authority of SNS vs individual programs.

(Ex. SNS guidelines on when Sub-I applications could be accepted, there was no uniformity in how it was handled. Some home institutions would not approve VSAS apps until April 15th while others did and some applicants were told spaces were full by the time their apps were allowed to go out.

It was the AAMC that made the 1 away rotation per student recommendation, not the SNS. The SNS only makes recommendations but has no enforcement power. I have talked with PD's who have openly acknowledged this fact. While I would like to imagine that the AAMC would be more heavy-handed in their decisions with some actual power to enforce them, in re-reading the online announcement they are pretty wishy-washy towards the end: 

"This guidance is intended to add to, but not supersede, the independent judgment of a medical school, sponsoring institution or residency program regarding the immediate needs of its patients and preparation of its learners." - (https://www.aamc.org/what-we-do/mission-...ency-cycle)

[Guest]

I talked to my advisor about this. He told me that some programs allow more than 1 away rotation to underrepresented groups. This applicant is a female so she would be in that category. This is to boost the representation of URMs and females in the field.

This applicant is getting attention because she talked about this on Twitter, but most such applicants keep it to themselves. They also have various other programs to boost underrepresented individuals, but programs speak directly to the individual and such programs are not talked about for obvious reasons.

[Guest]

I personally won't hold it against this girl if she interviews at my institution, but I understand people who do, and I absolutely understand why other applicants would be upset at this.

That being said, these SNS rules are ridiculous. The same people making these rules all gathered last week by the hundreds to pat each other on the back in person at CNS. So traveling for your industry sponsored happy hour is fine, but letting applicants visit where they'll spend the better part of the next decade is not? Makes sense.

[Guest]

If you think about it, it's ridiculous that interviews are virtual. At this point it seems to be more about virtue-signaling from a cost/equity perspective than it is about COVID. Perhaps one away and virtual interviews are here to stay, else someone complains.

[Guest]

During these trying times, the SNS recommendations are there to help promote equity in the match process…
…for wake forest and OHSU.

[Guest]

What did wake forest and ohsu do?