bad taste

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.

Its utility, as an aid to future classes, might best be served after rank lists are due, perhaps after match day. And I am surprised that nobody would consider secondary gain. I can dream it up easily, and I am honest - it's naive to think it could not happen in a forum like this. Further, useless comments that offer vague reasons for why UC Irvine is a bad program (I know nothing about the program), followed by vague replies, are not helpful. If you have something concrete to say, then say it professionally. Like: "I did not have a good feeling about the program director from X because of the way he described Y and how he handled questions about Z, and the residents did not seem to buy into his philosophy and did not act like a cohesive unit, etc. etc." Otherwise, it seems like we vent about programs we hate and hide behind self-professed altruistic motives. It's just a suggestion, my opinion, do what you want.

Ditto, what Jos24:15 said. It's possible to add to the discussion (positive or negative) and still remain professional. Ortho's a pretty small community, when all is said and done. And you never know who you'll be working with in the future.

FWIW, I thought UCI had some great positives. Energetic leadership, administrative support that goes to bat for their residents (according to the residents themselves), plus they matched their residents into top fellowships (HSS, etc).

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.

I've read this thread kind of chuckling, but I've decided to chime in. I am currently a resident at UC-Irvine and was very involved in the interview process. The comments about our chairman are somewhat humorous but unfortunate. It seems like he rubbed a lot of people the wrong way, and for this I apologize. But I'll say this, when you match here, you are really part of a family and he considers you part of the family. He stands up for us when we need it, he rips us when we need it, and he praises us when we need it. He isn't going to kiss our butts and sugar coat our mistakes, but at no time do you ever feel that he doesn't care. He treats us as family inviting us to his house to start the year, having his cell phone and an open line, etc. But I'm not going to try and pretend that all of you are horribly wrong in your impression of him; apparently he did something or said something that upset a lot of people (at least a lot of people who post on orthogate).

If you have any questions, please fell free to PM me. I'll try to answer everything as honestly as I can. I believe the bottom line of UCI is this: you get great operative training, have great mentors, have ample research opportunities, match into top fellowships, and live in Southern California.

By the way, in my opinion, even if its my program that's getting ripped, I believe its fair game to comment on what/who you DIDN'T like. You're going to spend 5 years of training here and its paramount you know all you can. If there are people you can't work with, you should know that.