Well,
I used to compile all the questions and answers on this site, giving full credit to all the contributors. Those who chose to remain anonymous stayed that way while those who gave me their names had their names included in the list of contributors. It worked really well for a while until:
People tried to sue me
No kidding, authors of books who have clearly ripped off content from this site were writing in threatening legal action against the contributors, showing how their books contain pages that have the same content as those who contributed their accounts and/or answers. I shall not be naming any publishers or authors but I am sorely disappointed by people putting profit above education. This was fine, I managed to get around this although I found it rather disturbing.
2. IBSCE threatened action against all the contributors - current and past
IBSCE administers the MRCS exams on behalf of the colleges. Their manager emailed me to threaten action against all candidates (especially the ones who were not anonymous) and demanded immediate compliance to their instructions. You can read the my reply below but I acted fast and deleted all traces of names and accounts.
For the safety of all contributors - all across the world, to preserve their medical licensing and good standing with the various surgical colleges - all the accounts were removed immediately. I applaud similar efforts by other parties that attempt to replicate the repository with complete anonymisation and without any reference to any exams. Google should help you find such accounts. Of course, the big elephant in the room remains: large for-profit sites still exist to milk money out of fear with blatant bold advertising and clearly having accounts of recent exams.
To a certain manager in IBSCE and the whole organisation:
"Although this is really unfair, I did as you asked. I would like to share your reply about the following with surgeons all over the world.
In my personal opinion:
1. This is against the spirit of medicine
Exams are meant to establish a set level of minimal competence. Every medical exam has quirks and cannot be cleared without understanding them, resulting in the proliferation of examination preparatory courses and books of all sorts. Examples of money making sites/courses are listed below:
ICBSE has gone against the small sole provider of free content but not against other money-making big organisations that are lifting off thousands of questions and replicating them word-for-word. They are content with people paying for courses where past examiners and past exam takers divulge exam content and charge exorbitant fees to PROFIT from the fear of exams.
As a large number of surgeons have selflessly contributed to this initiative, they all remember their basic duties as doctors. Remember the Hippocratic oath, adapted by most medical councils and schools with an emphasis on the proliferation of knowledge without profit, excerpts below:
"To hold my teacher in this art equal to my own parents; to make him partner in my livelihood; when he is in need of money to share mine with him; to consider his family as my own brothers, and to teach them this art, if they want to learn it, without fee or indenture; to impart precept, oral instruction, and all other instruction to my own sons, the sons of my teacher, and to indentured pupils who have taken the physician’s oath"
2. Knowing what examiners ask for and what examiners want helps candidates crystallize essential knowledge. If this set of knowledge is the required level of minimal competence, why penalise others from sharing this and spreading the knowledge?
3. This is not common practice among other Royal Colleges to prevent the promulgation of exam standards. Other Royal Colleges do not take such mean-spirited actions. For example, the Royal College of Ophthalmologist even lists on their website a link to another website run by an ophthalmologist with past year accounts listed as the right way to prepare for their own college exam.
As surgeons, have we lost our way?"