The argument to go to a more expensive, prestigious med school

[NickNaylor]

I just saw some of the videos you made for SDN and you seem like a pretty cool/chill guy so I mean this in the most benign of ways: have fun in psych, you're gonna enjoy it.

I appreciate it but your validation isn't necessary.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[DermViser]

I have tons of respect for you and your posts have helped me a lot in the past so no beef. That being said, I really don't have anything to hide so even if you're right idrc. I've developed fantastic relationships with every attending I've ever worked with and got glowing rec letters from them (I still text them regularly). Appreciate the concern but I think I'll be OK.

 

[DermViser]

I just saw some of the videos you made for SDN and you seem like a pretty cool/chill guy so I mean this in the most benign of ways: have fun in psych, you're gonna enjoy it.

I guess you can't hide your personality after all. You can't even fake it, MS-1.

 

[DermViser]

I appreciate it but your validation isn't necessary.

Esp. since it's obviously fake. For someone like him who says he can hide his true feelings and put on an act, he's failing pretty badly in that regard.

 

[Greenberg702]

I guess you can't hide your personality after all. You can't even fake it, MS-1.

 

[samsunimomo]

So I have two friends starting in Icahn SOM this year, and judging by their pictures, it seems that the class has already spent a lot of time together exploring NYC. In order to test the hypothesis of whether anonymous arrogance bleed through in real life, I wonder if they will have any idea of who Greenberg could be if I share this thread with them later in their medical education. But, then again, even if there is a positive result, my n=2, so it wouldn't be a significant scientific inquiry.

While thinking through this, I've also realized if the poster used his last name as part of his username, then that would defeat the purpose of the experiment in testing the hypothesis since I doubt there would be too many Greenbergs, even at Mt. Sinai.

My point in making this statement is that even under the veil of anonymity, it's not impossible to pick apart someone's identity online nowadays. It never hurts to be cordial, and nothing is ever anonymous.

 

[Greenberg702]

Esp. since it's obviously fake. For someone like him who says he can hide his true feelings and put on an act, he's failing pretty badly in that regard.

Why would I care about hiding anything when addressing you? You're also in med school and your opinions matter little outside of SDN.

 

[Greenberg702]

So I have two friends starting in Icahn SOM this year, and judging by their pictures, it seems that the class has already spent a lot of time together exploring NYC. In order to test the hypothesis of whether anonymous arrogance bleed through in real life, I wonder if they will have any idea of who Greenberg could be if I share this thread with them later in their medical education. But, then again, even if there is a positive result, my n=2, so it wouldn't be a significant scientific inquiry.

While thinking through this, I've also realized if the poster used his last name as part of his username, then that would defeat the purpose of the experiment in testing the hypothesis since I doubt there would be too many Greenbergs, even at Mt. Sinai.

lmfao. You got me . Greenberg couldn't possibly refer to anything else could it? 3.7/4 for effort

 

[DermViser]

Why would I care about hiding anything when addressing you? You're also in med school and your opinions matter little outside of SDN.

Wrong again, Padawan. I guess your 3.9+ at MIT with a 40+ MCAT, as a marker of your intelligence (and future board score) is lacking in in p-value.

 

[samsunimomo]

lmfao. You got me . Greenberg couldn't possibly refer to anything else could it? 3.7

Perhaps. There may be correlation between knowledge of medical reference authors and grade point average, but even with my incredibly mediocre knowledge, I wouldn't bet on it.

 

[samsunimomo]

Wrong again, Padawan. I guess your 3.9+ at MIT with a 40+ MCAT, as a marker of your intelligence (and future board score) is lacking in in p-value.

So Icahn and MIT, eh?

 

[Greenberg702]

Perhaps. There may be correlation between knowledge of medical reference authors and grade point average, but even with my incredibly mediocre knowledge, I wouldn't bet on it.

I wouldn't either. Be that as it may, I'm definitely not the cockiest one in school. Tons of frat bros/derm gunners here.

 

[Greenberg702]

Wrong again, Padawan. I guess your 3.9+ at MIT with a 40+ MCAT, as a marker of your intelligence (and future board score) is lacking in in p-value.

We'll see.

 

[DermViser]

I wouldn't either. Be that as it may, I'm definitely not the cockiest one in school. Tons of frat bros/derm gunners here.

Or it might be just your paranoid insecurities talking. Although it is MS-1, so not at all surprised the number of posers who want to do Neurosurg, Ortho, etc. bc of salary.

 

[DermViser]

We'll see.

Yes, bc I am sure you will tell us, if you were wrong otherwise. You have all the answers. Congrats.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

How did this thread morph into a bad cage match?

 

[Greenberg702]

So Icahn and MIT, eh?

I'll save you the trouble. There's nobody from MIT on the first year roster (and nobody named Greenberg). You really think I'd be foolish enough to not sub-out my true undergrad for a comparable school? Good luck.

 

[DermViser]

So Icahn and MIT, eh?

nvm. Not worth it.

 

[3vilgenius]

Damn, one dude says his good grades and tells it like it is and them bam thread derailed. The jealousy is real.

 

[TooMuchResearch]

The conclusion of this thread: no one knows **** about ****.

People...save yourself the time. This thread is basically empty.

No, it isn't. Go to the cheapest school that will take you. The odds of it having any effect on your future are very, very low. I know much about money/debt/personal finance, medical, the match, and residency.

 

[Amba]

So I have two friends starting in Icahn SOM this year, and judging by their pictures, it seems that the class has already spent a lot of time together exploring NYC. In order to test the hypothesis of whether anonymous arrogance bleed through in real life, I wonder if they will have any idea of who Greenberg could be if I share this thread with them later in their medical education. But, then again, even if there is a positive result, my n=2, so it wouldn't be a significant scientific inquiry.

While thinking through this, I've also realized if the poster used his last name as part of his username, then that would defeat the purpose of the experiment in testing the hypothesis since I doubt there would be too many Greenbergs, even at Mt. Sinai.

My point in making this statement is that even under the veil of anonymity, it's not impossible to pick apart someone's identity online nowadays. It never hurts to be cordial, and nothing is ever anonymous.

I thought Greenberg was at HMS. I could be wrong, though.

 

[DermViser]

Damn, one dude says his good grades and tells it like it is and them bam thread derailed. The jealousy is real.

Not really. If that's what you got from reading it, then no.

 

[DermViser]

I thought Greenberg was at HMS. I could be wrong, though.

He was referring to students.

 

[DermViser]

No, it isn't. Go to the cheapest school that will take you. The odds of it having any effect on your future are very, very low. I know much about money/debt/personal finance, medical, the match, and residency.

Depends very much on the school. Whether it's "worth" it, will depend on your medical school performance.

 

[gettheleadout]

The main problem is that you're talking about potential performance here, not actual performance.

Most people who get into med school have great grades and MCAT (3.7+, 32+ nowadays). This isn't like undergrad where 90% of your classmates couldn't score a 32 no matter how hard they tried. A significant number of your med school classmates will have even higher numbers (3.9/36+) depending on the school. Everyone is very smart. Now obviously, some people are still smarter than others (better cognitive potential/photographic memory) and there is still a gradient. However, you can have all the potential in the world (270+) and still not get that score.

My main point is this, there is so much information tested on step 1 that a good portion of it boils down to preparation and luck. If you, as a 250+ potential student choose not to study for months doing thousands of practice questions, and instead choose to spend only 4 weeks studying and the rest of your time with your family or future fiancee etc... then you may very likely end up with a 230 or 240. This happens to hundreds of med students each year and it usually turns out fine. At the same time, you can't memorize everything tested on step 1 and there are multiple different versions of the exam. Most people by nature of their curriculum, interests, and study habits are better at some subjects than others, and if you get lucky with an exam version that plays to your strengths, you may get a 260. Conversely, with another exam version you could easily get a 240.

So, unless you can predict your future life course and which version of the exam you'll get its hard to say for certain who will end up with a 250+ just based off GPA and MCAT. Now, I will agree that if you have very high stats (3.9/36+) and study your ass off during M2 and during step 1 prep, that you should have a reasonable expectation of a good score (likely 240+)(however, 250+ may be a bit much). But, there are too many other important factors in play to use pre-med stats as a reliable predictor of your future step 1 score.

Preparation is a non-issue. As a strong student I'm aware, as @Greenberg702 suggested, of the amount of time and effort that will be necessary to achieve my goals on Step 1. I began planning my prep for the MCAT years in advance, I'll do the same for Step 1. Forgive me if I simply don't believe you with regard to the luck factor. The same has been said about the MCAT; I can't tell you how many SDN posters I saw claim that scores above 40 were "just luck", yet my performance across 7 AAMC practice exams and the real deal never fell below 99th percentile. I realize the breadth and depth of content for Step 1 are far greater than the MCAT. However, so too are the educational experiences leading up to it (relatively tailored to Step 1 across M1/2 and spread out/sporadic/whatever across three years of undergrad).

Despite all the offense people have taken to his tone, @Greenberg702 is, in my opinion, correct in his statement about academic strength. @DermViser has said himself the only quantitative metrics we have to go on are GPA and MCAT, and like Greenberg, I too will be in the very highest minority of entering medical students in terms of these qualifications. I won't waste time reiterating that these predictors say nothing about future "doctoring" skill. However, though I wouldn't put it quite the way Greenberg did, it is important to consider the perspective scorers like he and I may have toward MCAT scores. For someone scoring 10 points higher, a 32 doesn't seem representative of intelligence sufficient enough to intimidate us, and the same could go for a 36. I have no misconception that I will be anywhere near the smartest student entering whatever school I attend; on the contrary the opposite is something I'm quite certain will be true and is an experience I look forward to with excitement.

Again I believe this is all a matter of perspective. I personally know a large percentage of the students in this year's entering class at my state medical school. None of them, despite similar prep resources and time, were able to score anywhere near the range I did, yet some of them did score 32-34 and no doubt some of them will go on to score 240+. If that is something they are capable of, I simply cannot fathom given what I know and feel about my potential and determination, I cannot far exceed that.

 

[DermViser]

Despite all the offense people have taken to his tone, @Greenberg702 is, in my opinion, correct in his statement about academic strength. @DermViser has said himself the only quantitative metrics we have to go on are GPA and MCAT, and like Greenberg, I too will be in the very highest minority of entering medical students in terms of these qualifications.

And like I said before, those are the only objective "biomarkers"/metrics we have with respect to prediction of Step 1 scores and medical school performance. It's why I asked you if you knew any other objective metrics/"biomarkers", and you didn't.

The correlation is moderate at best between MCAT score and Step 1 score. The MCAT is NOT the USMLE Step 1 with respect to type of questions or scope of information. Not even close. Heck there are even some BS/MDers like PL198, who haven't even taken the MCAT. So obviously medical schools feel that it's not that important. It's used as a recruiting tool simple as that.

 

[gettheleadout]

And like I said before, those are the only objective "biomarkers"/metrics we have with respect to prediction of Step 1 scores and medical school performance. It's why I asked you if you knew any other objective metrics/"biomarkers", and you didn't.

The correlation is moderate at best between MCAT score and Step 1 score. The MCAT is NOT the USMLE Step 1 with respect to type of questions or scope of information. Not even close. Heck there are even some BS/MDers like PL198, who haven't even taken the MCAT. So obviously medical schools feel that it's not that important. It's used as a recruiting tool simple as that.

I've elaborated on this in previous posts so I won't waste my time doing so again, but if you had any background in testing theory you'd know that the correlation between the MCAT and Step 1 is considered very strong.


Sent from my neural implant using SDN Mobile

 

[DermViser]

I've elaborated on this in previous posts so I won't waste my time doing so again, but if you had any background in testing theory you'd know that the correlation between the MCAT and Step 1 is considered very strong.

Sent from my neural implant using SDN Mobile

I've looked at actual PubMed articles on the subject. Hence why I said moderate correlation. Unless you know of articles that have upped the ante and said there are strong correlations. I would love to see them if you have them.

 

[DermViser]

Glad to see that your M1 course load is so light that you are scouring my post history just to take a cheap shot about my academic history (even though you have no idea what you're talking about). By the way, even though there's no point in trying to defend myself to jerk-off students like yourself, I actually scored really highly on boards, will likely be AOA and will be pursuing a very competitive specialty. Be careful how you talk to/treat people, they just might be your resident one day. Also, don't bother with silly, insincere apologies after insulting 99% of everyone beneath you - no one needs your lip service.

You'll have to excuse him, he got a 3.9+ GPA and 40+ MCAT and thinks that's his crystal ball to acing med school. MS-3which he thinks he'll be able to game by putting on a fake face for clerkships as if med students are only there from 9-5. He's in a for rude awakening, esp. at Icahn.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

I get it now! This argument is part of an elaborate scheme to troll the pre-Allo forum. Nothing else seems logical at this point.

 

[Ace Khalifa]

Smh. Don't even think for a second that you can fake your way thru preclinical or MS3. I'd rather be authentically altruistic than have high stats and be a jerk. My stats are 3.7/36, alum of Wash U, but of course they'd still be considered low by elitist pricks.

 

[DermViser]

Smh. Don't even think for a second that you can fake your way thru preclinical or MS3. I'd rather be authentically altruistic than have high stats and be a jerk. My stats are 3.7/36, alum of Wash U, but of course they'd still be considered low by elitist pricks.

The fact Greenberg thinks he has a better chance at success in med school bc he has a 3.9 and the other person only had a 3.7, shows he doesn't really know anything about anything. It's typical of your sociopath medical student who thinks they can pull one over on interns/residents/attendings as if they haven't been in medical school before. People see them from a mile away.

 

[gettheleadout]

I've looked at actual PubMed articles on the subject. Hence why I said moderate correlation. Unless you know of articles that have upped the ante and said there are strong correlations. I would love to see them if you have them.

I'm really not interested in continuing this back and forth any further. Suffice to say I'm not so foolish as to have neglected to read the published literature on the subject. I've said what I wanted to say in this thread already, I'll be stepping out now.


Sent from my neural implant using SDN Mobile

 

[DermViser]

I'm really not interested in continuing this back and forth any further. Suffice to say I'm not so foolish as to have neglected to read the published literature on the subject. I've said what I wanted to say in this thread already, I'll be stepping out now.

Sent from my neural implant using SDN Mobile

It was a sincere and genuine request. Every piece of literature on the topic in Pubmed has shown at best a moderate correlation between MCAT score and USMLE Step 1 score. Hence why I specifically asked you if you've seen an article that states something different or states that there is a very strong correlation between MCAT score and USMLE Step 1 score. If you don't have it, that's absolutely fine, but it's clear then, that it's nothing more than your opinion.

 

[Ace Khalifa]

The fact Greenberg thinks he has a better chance at success in med school bc he has a 3.9 and the other person only had a 3.7, shows he doesn't really know anything about anything. It's typical of your sociopath medical student who thinks they can pull one over on interns/residents/attendings as if they haven't been in medical school before. People see them from a mile away.

So does this mean I have actually have a chance? And those with similar or worse stats than mine?

 

[DermViser]

So does this mean I have actually have a chance? And those with similar or worse stats than mine?

Have a chance at what? Being at the top of your class and high board scores in medical school?

 

[gettheleadout]

It was a sincere and genuine request. Every piece of literature on the topic in Pubmed has shown at best a moderate correlation between MCAT score and USMLE Step 1 score. Hence why I specifically asked you if you've seen an article that states something different or states that there is a very strong correlation between MCAT score and USMLE Step 1 score. If you don't have it, that's absolutely fine, but it's clear then, that it's nothing more than your opinion.

This is straight from the 2007 meta by Donnon et al.:

The MCAT total has a large predictive validity coefficient (r = 0.66; 43.6% of the variance) effect size for USMLE Step 1

You know why they say "large" here in reference to r = 0.66? Because in the context of psychological testing, validity coefficients of r > 0.4 are considered to be "very useful," the highest category of predictive value. The strength of a correlation coefficient depends on the context. This standard of predictive value is part of basic test theory as described to me by the PhD and licensed psychologist professor that taught my course on the subject.

In any case, this particular relationship is but one aspect in the rather multifaceted explanation I gave earlier explaining the reasoning behind my confidence.

 

[Ace Khalifa]

Have a chance at what? Being at the top of your class and high board scores in medical school?

No, just like surviving MS3 rotations and matching somewhere we like. Not talking about academia or the most prestigious places.

 

[DermViser]

This is straight from the 2007 meta by Donnon et al.:

You know why they say "large" here in reference to r = 0.66? Because in the context of psychological testing, validity coefficients of r > 0.4 are considered to be "very useful," the highest category of predictive value. The strength of a correlation coefficient depends on the context. This standard of predictive value is part of basic test theory as described to me by the PhD and licensed psychologist professor that taught my course on the subject.

In any case, this particular relationship is but one aspect in the rather multifaceted explanation I gave earlier explaining the reasoning behind my confidence.

You apparently didn't see that it was a meta-analysis: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17198300

CONCLUSIONS:
The predictive validity of the MCAT ranges from small to medium for both medical school performance and medical board licensing exam measures. The medical profession is challenged to develop screening and selection criteria with improved validity that can supplement the MCAT as an important criterion for admission to medical schools.

 

[gettheleadout]

You apparently didn't see that it was a meta-analysis: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17198300

CONCLUSIONS:
The predictive validity of the MCAT ranges from small to medium for both medical school performance and medical board licensing exam measures. The medical profession is challenged to develop screening and selection criteria with improved validity that can supplement the MCAT as an important criterion for admission to medical schools.

Not sure if that jab makes sense seeing as I referred to it as a meta in my post. But mind clarifying what you mean? I'm reasonably comfortable saying my quote from the body of the paper trumps yours from the abstract.

 

[DermViser]

No, just like surviving MS3 rotations and matching somewhere we like. Not talking about academia or the most prestigious places.

Um yeah, of course. Your undergraduate GPA is not some type of clairvoyance on your MS-3 rotation performance or your med school performance. There will always be people like the person you mention who will try to psych you out by saying they'll do better bc they have a 3.9 vs. a 3.7. It's not true. I realize it's easier to compartmentalize and try to find some hard and fast rule when it comes to an objective metric and overall school performance but that's not the case.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

So does this mean I have actually have a chance? And those with similar or worse stats than mine?

I can't comment on "potential med school performance" like the more senior members, but you do realize that your MCAT is somewhere in the 96th-97th percentile. It is the median score for schools like Stanford, Harvard, Cornell, and Columbia. And you survived Wash U undergrad with a 3.7. I'm confident you'll do well in med school.

 

[DermViser]

Not sure if that jab makes sense seeing as I referred to it as a meta in my post. But mind clarifying what you mean? I'm reasonably comfortable saying my quote from the body of the paper trumps yours from the abstract.

Fine - I'll quote from the Discussion section of the paper:
The MCAT—as a total score and subtests— has small to medium predictive validity of performance in medical school during both the preclinical and clinical years. It is somewhat better at predicting performance on medical licensing exams, accounting for 44% of the variance overall on the USMLE Step 1 and 19% on the USMLE Step 2. The discrepancy in the predictive validity of the MCAT and its subtests between medical school and licensing exam performance is probably attributable to domain and method specificity. Both the MCAT and licensing exams assess knowledge and cognition (the domain) by employing objective testing methods (usually multiple-choice questions), whereas during medical school, other domains (e.g., practical skills) using various methods (e.g., observations, checklists) are assessed.

 

[DermViser]

I can't comment on "potential med school performance" like the more senior members, but you do realize that your MCAT is somewhere in the 96th-97th percentile. It is the median score for schools like Stanford, Harvard, Cornell, and Columbia. And you survived Wash U undergrad with a 3.7. I'm confident you'll do well in med school.

Which is why he shouldn't take Greenberg's (uninformed) posts to heart. You would be a fool to think that bc you got a 3.9, you would do better in medical school than a 3.7, both at elite undergrads. Not to mention most of your rank will be determined by MS-3 not the first 2 years in which you're sitting and taking exams.

 

[Greenberg702]

Um yeah, of course. Your undergraduate GPA is not some type of clairvoyance on your MS-3 rotation performance or your med school performance. There will always be people like the person you mention who will try to psych you out by saying they'll do better bc they have a 3.9 vs. a 3.7. It's not true. I realize it's easier to compartmentalize and try to find some hard and fast rule when it comes to an objective metric and overall school performance but that's not the case.

I never said that a high undergraduate GPA would correlate with MS-3 performance (only boards) so idk what you're smoking but keep attacking me brah. Sorry I did well in college.

 

[DermViser]

I never said that a high undergraduate GPA would correlate with MS-3 performance (only boards) so idk what you're smoking but keep attacking me brah. Sorry I did well in college.

You're right, you said:

"In all honesty, a 3.7+ and 32+ are joke stats. I know people who got those and they're incredibly mediocre. The vast majority of MD students are not that impressive. I got a 3.9+ from a top 5, super grade-deflated school and a 40+. I am stronger academically than 99% of matriculating MD students."

"I know what I am capable of and am prepared to sacrifice almost anything to get a 250/260+. My profile (and lead's seems similar) makes it extremely likely that we will score in that range."

"Of course if you "choose not to study for months" then you won't realize your potential but the majority of people with our kind of stats understands the dedication needed to achieve success."

And as mentioned by others in this thread, your arrogance which you mistakenly believe that you can easily mask on MS-3 clerkships with one face in front of classmate rotators/interns/residents/attendings and a completely different one at home (not realizing that your classmates will already know your true personality quite well after knowing you at the end of MS-1 and MS-2, many of whom you will work with directly, and can just as easily throw you under the bus, so to speak, in various ways).

Your response to that was: "That being said, I really don't have anything to hide so even if you're right idrc. I've developed fantastic relationships with every attending I've ever worked with and got glowing rec letters from them (I still text them regularly)."

As if working with attendings for some AMCAS volunteering/research activity is exactly the same as your duties and responsibilities with concomitant hours on an MS-3 clerkship. You couldn't even mask your hubris and arrogance with your faux compliment to @NickNaylor.

 

[DermViser]

I never said that a high undergraduate GPA would correlate with MS-3 performance (only boards) so idk what you're smoking but keep attacking me brah. Sorry I did well in college.

I'll have to check the literature again, but the correlation between undergraduate GPA and Step 1 score is also not not a strong correlation. Maybe more with preclinical performance. If you have a paper stating that I would be happy to see it. Also, no one is attacking you, brah.

 

[Greenberg702]

You're right, you said:

"In all honesty, a 3.7+ and 32+ are joke stats. I know people who got those and they're incredibly mediocre. The vast majority of MD students are not that impressive. I got a 3.9+ from a top 5, super grade-deflated school and a 40+. I am stronger academically than 99% of matriculating MD students."

"I know what I am capable of and am prepared to sacrifice almost anything to get a 250/260+. My profile (and lead's seems similar) makes it extremely likely that we will score in that range."

"Of course if you "choose not to study for months" then you won't realize your potential but the majority of people with our kind of stats understands the dedication needed to achieve success."

And as mentioned by others in this thread, your arrogance which you mistakenly believe that you can easily mask on MS-3 clerkships with one face in front of classmate rotators/interns/residents/attendings and a completely different one at home (not realizing that your classmates will already know your true personality quite well after knowing you at the end of MS-1 and MS-2, many of whom you will work with directly, and can just as easily throw you under the bus, so to speak, in various ways).

Your response to that was: "That being said, I really don't have anything to hide so even if you're right idrc. I've developed fantastic relationships with every attending I've ever worked with and got glowing rec letters from them (I still text them regularly)."

As if working with attendings for some AMCAS volunteering/research activity is exactly the same as your duties and responsibilities with concomitant hours on an MS-3 clerkship. You couldn't even mask your arrogance with your faux compliment to @NickNaylor.

Yeah and the top 1/2 of that specifically addresses "academic strength," which I used in reference to Step I performance, not MS-3. I honestly couldn't care less how you think I'll perform on MS-3. You don't know me and I (thankfully) don't know you. I never said that I specifically would be faking anything, only that many people do, in fact, just that (not only for MS-3 but unfortunately for med school interviews as well). Get off my back.

 

[Greenberg702]

I'll have to check the literature again, but the correlation between undergraduate GPA and Step 1 score is also not not a strong correlation. Maybe more with preclinical performance. If you have a paper stating that I would be happy to see it. Also, no one is attacking you, brah.

"Greenberg's (uninformed) posts to heart. You would be a fool to think that"
"There will always be people like the person you mention who will try to psych you out"
"doesn't really know anything about anything. It's typical of your sociopath medical student"

I, unlike you, am not giving any sort of advice or trying to psych anyone out. I just said that my stats were 99% according to the AAMC. If you think what I said was arrogant and that I'll get hit during MS-3 then that's your business. Again, I don't really care what you think about my future MS-3 performance.

 

[AspiringERMD]

This might be the most pointless thread I've ever seen on SDN.