Jos24]
I do not see how a thread that tears programs down posted by people who can hid behind anonymity is useful two days before rank lists are due. Further, the incentive is created to bad mouth programs for secondary gain. Not that this would happen, but when people can post anonymously in this way, you get the point. If you are concerned about future applicants, contribute to this thread after rank lists are due. Better yet, do it after match day.
Jos24]
I have to agree with Jos24:15 on this one fellas. The only "bad taste" around here is this thread. It's bad enough to single out programs, but to single out one person is rude, disrespectful, and bottom line it's poor form. I think it would be wise to lay off a little. The fact that you feel the need to hide behind the ROL_2010 account to maintain anonymity should be the first sign that it must be something that is better left unsaid.... Just sayin'. Good luck with the upcoming match.
B4B
Jos24]
I have to agree with Jos24:15 on this one fellas. The only "bad taste" around here is this thread. It's bad enough to single out programs, but to single out one person is rude, disrespectful, and bottom line it's poor form. I think it would be wise to lay off a little. The fact that you feel the need to hide behind the ROL_2010 account to maintain anonymity should be the first sign that it must be something that is better left unsaid.... Just sayin'. Good luck with the upcoming match.
B4B
I don't understand how discussing programs who left a bad impression is in poor taste. And singling individuals out when they are PD's or chairman who have chosen to take on a role of representing their institution is completely in bounds. It would be nice if people would be a little more concrete about what points left a bad taste but I think this is a useful discussion. The issue of using the ROL_2010 account is very valid though. This is already an anonymous forum, people should not be using a doubly anonymous account to post this information.
I have to agree with Jos24]
I don't understand how discussing programs who left a bad impression is in poor taste. And singling individuals out when they are PD's or chairman who have chosen to take on a role of representing their institution is completely in bounds. It would be nice if people would be a little more concrete about what points left a bad taste but I think this is a useful discussion. The issue of using the ROL_2010 account is very valid though. This is already an anonymous forum, people should not be using a doubly anonymous account to post this information.
I agree with Orthoden. Especially when it comes to malignant PDs/chairpersons, it is important to know what we're getting into. On the good side, I heard fantastic things about Nebraska's chairman and PD from multiple residents at other residencies, then found that the reports were true when I went there for an interview. The leadership sets the atmosphere of a program and we shouldn't be donning rose-colored glasses when we look for training positions that will control the majority of our lives for the next few years.
Jos24]
I have to agree with Jos24:15 on this one fellas. The only "bad taste" around here is this thread. It's bad enough to single out programs, but to single out one person is rude, disrespectful, and bottom line it's poor form. I think it would be wise to lay off a little. The fact that you feel the need to hide behind the ROL_2010 account to maintain anonymity should be the first sign that it must be something that is better left unsaid.... Just sayin'. Good luck with the upcoming match.
B4B
I disagree w B4B and Jos24:15, and would have to agree with the OP (new poster to this thread)...
Too often we as applicants we are made to jump through hoops that are so ridiculous that even one ten minute span of what we deal with on a regular basis would be so upsetting to an attending that he would probably tell everybody in his extended circle about it and it would probably upset his month, but for an applicant these things are considered par for the course.
There are several attendings/ programs out there that regularly display lack of respect towards applicants, other programs, etc. I do not believe that it is poor form to point out these behaviors, granted that it is done without ulterior motives, and can be vouched for from personal experience.
After all, I think it is fairly useless to ALL applicants when you have 300 threads talking up how awesome every program is "Great city, great camarederie, residents operate a lot, strong didactics, on the upswing, yada yada", but people complain and cry anytime any thread period that can be construed as negative is started. Keep professional, and defend your impressions with details, but be (bluntly) honest as well. But remember, after all, 5 yrs of your life is a lot more important than one man's (who in all reality does not read this)'s feelings to anonymous criticism.