ianfaircloud

I missed this, too. This NYU rejection doesn't look legitimate. We'd see quite a few more than this. Many of us applied to NYU, and no one has posted about it. So unless this person was rejected through a personal contact in the department, then it's almost certainly not legitimate.

I think you're half-right. I don't think a committee would literally throw a piece of an application in the garbage. But I think a piece could be completely disregarded, and I think a dutiful member of an admissions committee would overlook any extra pieces that do not belong in the application file. No one should be able to gain an advantage by submitting materials outside the list of what's expected in the file. So it would be inequitable for an admissions committee to take a look at the book, in my view.

It would have to be that the person actually received it Friday or Saturday, e.g., and didn't specify this in the post. Doubtful. It's probably fake. It's worth saying this, however: there have been very, very few fakes on the website so far this season. Only one fake stands out, and that was the Yale rejection.

Thanks for this information! Good to know. Regarding Harvard, it's not out of the question that people could have received rejections via postal mail on Saturday, February 15. Perhaps this person didn't specify the date of the receipt of the rejection letter. Still, as I said in the 'rejection thread', I find it hard to believe that the Harvard rejection is legitimate. I live a mile from Harvard. Surely I'd be among the first to receive a rejection.

It's not totally out of the question that Harvard sent a rejection via postal service. But what's odd is that I haven't received one. I live a mile from Harvard, so I would think I would be the first to receive a rejection via postal mail. Perhaps this rejected person lives here, too. Still, where's my rejection letter? I didn't expect Harvard to send notices until Friday.

As far as I know, Pittsburgh wasn't greatly disturbed by the winter weather. I don't think Pitt had to close. Now Philadelphia was hit hard, and if I remember correctly, Penn had to close for a day. So it's possible that some of these departments, like Penn and Georgetown, had to cancel admission committee meetings. Given the track of the storm, I think the schools roughly along the I-95 corridor experienced the greatest impact. So that includes schools from Washington, D.C., through Baltimore, Philadelphia, New Jersey, New York City, New Haven, Providence, and Boston. Many schools in Boston had to close for a day, I know. And Maryland was pretty much shut down. (Areas north of Baltimore had close to 20 inches of snow.) Schools along this route (that have not released initial notifications to my knowledge): Georgetown, Johns Hopkins, Penn, Princeton, Rutgers, Columbia, CUNY, Harvard, MIT, Boston University.

Thanks! I've enjoyed having some role here. Regarding Pitt, I don't know why the department is so late this time. I don't think that the application deadline was moved back this year. But I hope we hear something soon!

Sorry. Accidentally down voted. Can that be undone? edit: I up voted your last post. Cancels out???

Good question. And now to plug my blog: I addressed your question here.

There's no way that the sending the book itself would have hurt your chances. It's about the writing sample, the letters of recommendation, and the SOP/fit with the dept. I can't imagine that members of admissions committees would penalize an applicant for sending something extra. I also think it's highly likely that the committees immediately discarded and forgot about the book altogether. So while their reading of the book could hurt, I really, really doubt that anyone read it. I think you're in the same boat as many of us. You're worried. Your worries, though, should have to do with the things that matter. The book won't be one of those things.

Vineyard, I'm trying to be as charitable to you as possible. But in this context -- and context matters a great deal here -- it's inappropriate to suggest the possibility that this woman is or could be a liar or crazy. There are ways to suggest the possibility of Ludlow's innocence without being insensitive.

Wow, I wish I knew more about this committee, how it conducted itself, what its members knew and didn't know, etc.

Indeed. What I hope Vineyard meant to say is something to the effect of, "Hey, let's not come to conclusions yet about Ludlow's guilt or innocence with respect to the gravest of the crimes/harms of which he is accused." Because I saw some posts on this forum that suggested that people had already come to conclusions of this kind. But yes, any hints or suggestions that this woman is crazy or a liar are exactly the kinds of assumptions that are both deeply troubling and indicative of the wider problem that persists among our departments of philosophy.

I did, too. Found out later that there were a few schools that didn't need them. It's a lot of trouble to contact every school for this purpose, particularly because many schools won't keep your file after the season. I spent about $600 sending GRE scores the second time. Just part of the expense of applications.

Sounds like a lot of speculation. I see no reason to attempt to weigh evidence and come to any meaningful conclusion, on this forum, on the matter of whether Ludlow harassed or assaulted this person. Any speculation (e.g. "could", "if", "maybe", "possible", "might", etc.) only suggests what I take to be Vineyard's intended point: we simply don't know what happened. The proper thing is for the proper authorities to investigate the case and come to a conclusion based only on relevant evidence. The investigation begins by taking very, very seriously the possibility that a woman was assaulted, harassed, or in some way harmed by a man in a position of power. It also begins by not assuming that Ludlow is guilty.

Stanford is up. I'm checking with a few people to find out whether this is legit. Please post if you have information. Update: The usual source doesn't know, either. I'll update my blog when I hear more. Update: An hour later, and no info on Stanford. Also no more posts related to Stanford. I'm not believing it until I see something more.

Any word on whether the Carnegie Mellon rejection is legit? Supposed to come out any day now.

First of all, mega congrats are due on the Yale wait list. I'm very jealous. I think no news from Berkeley is bad news. I assume rejection. Sorry, folks. I would have loved to be there, too.

Yale hasn't sent rejections. Just FYI I'm keeping a list of what I believe are legitimate reports of notifications. See my blog. Click 'notifications'.

These are people who I know personally. These aren't through the Internet.

The Yale wait-list is legit. I spoke with someone today who was wait-listed. They went out sometime this evening. Slightly personal emails.

Yes, too bold. But it would not be too bold to take this as prima facie good news. I'd wait a few days and double check all forms of communication (website, email, spam) in the meantime. I don't think it's inappropriate to contact a department in the case that you know the department has sent both acceptances and rejections. When you contact them, you say, "I have friends who have received both of these. I've not received anything. I wondered if I missed some attempt at communication." Something to that effect. That's what I'd do. There are risks either way. Contact them, annoy them. Don't contact, miss something important.

Sadly, I think you're right to believe this. U Chicago doesn't do wait-list notifications typically. U Arizona already sent wait-list notifications. I don't know much about Loyola Chicago.

That's awesome for you. I think you're an exception. But I guess that's the point, right: there are exceptions. But let me tell you, I can say with complete confidence that nobody -- I mean no one -- is coming from my undergraduate institution and getting into a top-30 PhD program, without first attending an MA program. I'm very, very confident about that. So maybe it depends in part on how weak the institution is. Well, to be clear, we're not talking about an MA glass ceiling. We're talking about a "weak-undergraduate-institution" glass ceiling. I think the thread would more properly be titled something to this effect. Note what MApplicant said: "only applicants who attended either a prestigious, well-known undergrad institution and/or an institution with a graduate program in philosophy prior to their MA are admitted to top-20 PhD programs in philosophy."

I'd be curious how many applicants to Notre Dame are admitted in part because those applicants attended relatively-weak undergraduate institutions with religious ties. Understandably, Notre Dame aims to be particularly inclusive of those with religious backgrounds. There are a lot of capable students of philosophy attending little-known private schools for this reason. Totally a guess here.