Medicine Community Feedback and Suggestions

And I think it is a bit disingenuous to say you are engaging directly with users, as most of the people who have commented have said they would like offer holder threads to continue? You say you would have abolished them if this was the consensus, but not that you will create them when that is the preferred option?

I don't want to argue, but just do not see what the point is of asking us what we want when you have made a decision as to what will happen - presumably ratified by staff at whatever level, for whatever reason. That is not working together. Just tell us you are imposing things and we have to get on with it - I work for the NHS so I am certainly used to that as management style

It was a response to your comment that decisions were made by volunteers "partly motivated by a need to preserve our own mental health and wellbeing". My comment was just that nobody should feel their mental health and wellbeing are at risk over expectations, that is all.

And I think it is a bit disingenuous to say you are engaging directly with users, as most of the people who have commented have said they would like offer holder threads to continue? You say you would have abolished them if this was the consensus, but not that you will create them when that is the preferred option?

I don't want to argue, but just do not see what the point is of asking us what we want when you have made a decision as to what will happen - presumably ratified by staff at whatever level, for whatever reason. That is not working together. Just tell us you are imposing things and we have to get on with it - I work for the NHS so I am certainly used to that as management style

I feel like there might be a misunderstanding here about the timescale of how long it took to make this decision. This thread was made a month ago with the hope of collating a large amount of feedback but unfortunately we only got a few responses at that time. Only five days ago we received more feedback, when there was greater need to make a decision as soon as possible. These were the options that were available to proceed with (taken from I think the 4th post of this thread):

(a) Do a big push for offer holder threads to be created - I haven't heard a justification to do this as of yet
(b) Endorse an offer holder thread if a user makes one, but not push for loads of them
(c) At a suitable date, change applicant thread titles to be offer holders
(d) Abolish offer holder threads
(e) Something else

What we've ended up with seems to be a mix of (b) and (c), which I don't actually see an actual problem with, as we're avoiding (d) and volunteers and FHs are only really taking a step back to support users to become an active and independent community. This, I think would be a good opportunity to test out a way the Medicine forum can improve. I feel like the matter at hand currently that needs to be approached might be feedback from the community on how we could improve how feedback can be responded to in the future. How could we improve a thread like this to ensure we don't receive dissatisfaction as we have at the moment? (Although, I perceive it's difficult to completely avoid dissatisfaction, but work to reduce it as much as possible)

I personally feel like this was a transparent decision (not imposing a decision and telling everyone to deal with it) since, as a previous applicant, I had a misconception that only volunteers and FHs were allowed to make official applicant or offer holder's threads. Before this decision was made, all users have always had the ability to make these threads, then volunteers and FHs could do the background admin to make them official threads. Nothing has changed on that account. Maybe the most obvious change would be that applicant threads that an applicant has not yet felt the need to make a offer holder's thread for by a specific date would be changed into a combined applicant and offer holder's thread.

In all cases, the community is supported to make a decision on whether they want an offer holder's thread or not. If they want an offer holder's thread, then volunteers can support them to independently make one and make them official. If they feel as though there is no need and that they are happy with continuing discussion in the applicant's thread, then volunteers will just change the title of the thread.

Through this option, we could have offer holder's threads for every applicant thread or a mix of separate and combined thread. It's up to the community on what they feel there is a need for.

Apologies for the long read, but I felt that it might be useful to share my perspective on the decision that was made. It's a compromise, so that the workload that volunteers are currently using to mass-make threads could instead potentially be focussed on a project to improve the medicine forum for the future to support the community better.

I hope what I've said makes sense and doesn't turn out to be a bit of a ramble 🙈

Like the choices I used to give my children
M: Do you want broccoli, carrots or both with your tea
C: We want neither
M: That was not an option vailable to you!

M: Do you want to clean your teeth before or after your bath?
C: No bath, no teeth
M: That was not an option available to you



If you wanted a timely answer, you need to ask on the active threads, as that is where the people are
As you know, i have nothing invested one way or the other - my role is mostly pre-application, but I was just feeding back the general feeling on the threads

😅 I can see how that might be how it seems, but there's always an option for something else
That's definitely good feedback for future threads like this!

Thank you

You are a definite asset for TSR!

Nothing like everyone who's been giving up their time to help the community much longer than me! I think we all share a goal to make the way we help more effective

- Duplicate offer holder threads will be merged with the existing official offer holder thread, unless it is too large - whereby it shall be closed.

What we've ended up with seems to be a mix of (b) and (c), which I don't actually see an actual problem with, as we're avoiding (d) and volunteers and FHs are only really taking a step back to support users to become an active and independent community.

I found TSR really helpful when I was applying for medicine, and I always planned to remain active and return the favour for other applicants (especially those like me, who are coming as career changers with an atypical background - there isn't much info online for us). One reason why I don't post as much as I thought I would is that the community seems to have disappeared. The various subforums are just a sea of threads with near-identical titles, asking the same questions, often with posts that are barely one line ("Hi, pls tell me can I get into mbbs with these grades"), made by drive-by posters who don't stick around. Responding to most of these posts feels like being a chatbot replying to another chatbot rather than a participant in a community. The forum had a much more cohesive feel when it was more actively moderated by BtN and ecolier, and that encouraged regular participation. I'm not saying that I think their approach was viable long-term for unpaid volunteers - it must have taken hours - but what it does suggest is that the medicine forum may need a different strategy from areas of TSR that don't get as much as footfall (and consequently may run themselves more smoothly).

Another reason why the medicine forum may need more active moderation is the potential for misinformation. Medicine is a subject with a high number of applicants, and there are a correspondingly high number of misconceptions surrounding the application process, the degree, and the career. This just isn't the case for most other courses. Addressing this properly requires TSR to have a good number of doctors and current med students on board to ensure information is current and accurate, and now there are hardly any of us. The quality of this forum has visibly declined since the changes, and it seems as if TSR is trying to frame that decline as a positive thing - e.g. "supporting users to become active and independent" - rather than acknowledging it is symptomatic of a problem that needs fixing.

Apologies for the lack of moderation, as you say it was very different with the previous VTs but unfortunately I am unable to give the combined time which both of them were able to.

Moderation is a key issue at the moment that we are trying to address but this takes time and as you say due to this the threads do contain consistent rule breaking.

Unfortunately it needs everyone to be using the report function, there are paid moderators who deal with all of that but unless there is a post report to flag something up they aren't going to see it. I certainly can't see the suggestion for TSR to pay doctors/current med students that @TheMedicOwl made (I like the suggestion) likely to happen when the community aren't fully utilising the staff that TSR already pay to keep the forums clean, safe and tidy.

I think this is a vicious cycle. The drive-by threads that give the forum such a transient feel aren't against any rules, so they can't be reported. The only rule that is being breached is the request for group chats, and people who want to actually be part of a community rather than an increasingly sprawling and impersonal forum have no motivation to report those - they want to access those chats. Why would they help TSR to reduce its competition from social media if TSR can't provide them with any of the benefits they get from the chat?

Apologies for the lack of moderation, as you say it was very different with the previous VTs but unfortunately I am unable to give the combined time which both of them were able to.

Moderation is a key issue at the moment that we are trying to address but this takes time and as you say due to this the threads do contain consistent rule breaking.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated

I found TSR really helpful when I was applying for medicine, and I always planned to remain active and return the favour for other applicants (especially those like me, who are coming as career changers with an atypical background - there isn't much info online for us). One reason why I don't post as much as I thought I would is that the community seems to have disappeared. The various subforums are just a sea of threads with near-identical titles, asking the same questions, often with posts that are barely one line ("Hi, pls tell me can I get into mbbs with these grades"), made by drive-by posters who don't stick around. Responding to most of these posts feels like being a chatbot replying to another chatbot rather than a participant in a community. The forum had a much more cohesive feel when it was more actively moderated by BtN and ecolier, and that encouraged regular participation. I'm not saying that I think their approach was viable long-term for unpaid volunteers - it must have taken hours - but what it does suggest is that the medicine forum may need a different strategy from areas of TSR that don't get as much as footfall (and consequently may run themselves more smoothly).

Another reason why the medicine forum may need more active moderation is the potential for misinformation. Medicine is a subject with a high number of applicants, and there are a correspondingly high number of misconceptions surrounding the application process, the degree, and the career. This just isn't the case for most other courses. Addressing this properly requires TSR to have a good number of doctors and current med students on board to ensure information is current and accurate, and now there are hardly any of us. The quality of this forum has visibly declined since the changes, and it seems as if TSR is trying to frame that decline as a positive thing - e.g. "supporting users to become active and independent" - rather than acknowledging it is symptomatic of a problem that needs fixing.

That's the same for all of the universities section I'm afraid, and has been the case for years

Rusty, you are doing an amazing job, and we are lucky to have you! But rightly or wrongly, the medicine forum was used to things being done differently. I am maybe just too old and curmudgeonly to like change, but I could not agree more with TheMedicOwl that the community feel has gone - I maybe post 1/3 to a half of what I have in previous years (sure someone can check my stats), because the sense of belonging, ownership and commitment is not there any more. But that is not down to you, as you do an excellent job - I do keep reporting, honest!

That's the same for all of the universities section I'm afraid, and has been the case for years

The digital landscape has obviously changed a lot since the advent of social media, and forums aren't as popular as they were, but they still have advantages that I don't think are being fully utilised here. Two that jump to mind are longevity (information-rich posts can easily be found by people searching for a related topic years after they were posted) and accuracy (long-form posting encourages people to check info more carefully rather than just blurting out the first thing to come to mind). For medicine applicants specifically, a third major advantage is that the forum encourages perseverance. When people go away to set up WhatsApp groups it's usually because they have an interview or an offer and they're hoping to meet fellow students. As we know, the majority of applicants don't get offers, so they're left out in the cold. Historically one of the medicine forum's main strengths has been showing people how to reapply strategically and offering some comfort and camaraderie through the process, so it would make good sense for TSR to look at the needs of this user group first and foremost. There's no reason why a forum shouldn't still be a vibrant place even if it is old-fashioned.