HomoLudens

Just saw the UCSD acceptance. I think I might cry. UCSD was my absolute top choice. Pitt was a close second.

Just saw the UCSD acceptance. I think I might cry. UCSD was my absolute top choice. Pitt was a close second.

I dreamt of attending Pitt for two years. Sucks to not have gotten an acceptance.

I feel like I am in a weird position. I don't actually feel imposter syndrome. Maybe it is because I am doing an MA now and so I already worked through it two years ago? I would be interested in hearing other people who did an MA.
 
If it isn't imposter syndrome, then what am I feeling? Maybe it is frustration that I think I have produced good work and it isn't being recognized, and I have the firm conviction that I can keep learning and producing better work in the future. In that case, I must be feeling a kind of narcissisms and resentment (which makes sense considering my personality). 

I think you are largely right, there are good application portfolios and there are bad ones. The problem I think is that there is no real way to determine objectively just what it means to have a good one or a bad one. Surely having a LOR from a big name is going to help you get ahead in the running. Studying at an Ivy already gives you an advantage in terms of resources, background, and support that can't be found at a small LAC.
Still, there are people (I will include myself) who have worked really hard to produce a quality sample, having it be read by major people in the field, getting feedback, refining it, presenting it at conferences, have it be pending acceptance to a journal, etc. etc. etc.  and to see all of that work be pointless. Admittedly, my interests are fairly niche (Sample on Kant exegesis that a non-scholar probably won't find interesting). It could very well be that the reason I didn't get accepted is because I went too narrow. Who the hell knows.
Am I bad philosopher? Maybe. However, those of you have done a MA at a school with a PhD program probably know quite well that many PhDs are quite poor philosophers. This is my subjective judgement, but in so far as it is anecdotal it illustrates that putting an emphasis on the quality of the individual and their work is hardly the full story. Not everyone who gets into Harvard Yale and Princeton in one cycle are going to be the next Wittgenstein (though they are probably much closer to him than me). 
Sorry for the ramble.

My guess is that, because (unfortunately, as has been noted recently) the same folks tend to get accepted to the top programs, even this year, those programs will have a relatively similar yield to usual. On the other hand, lower-ranked programs, which some applicants are in some years less keen on, might see more interest and thus higher yield.

Wait list at Stony Brook. Finally some better news. 

At this point (when you are being waitlisted) they probably aren't going to look at your material any closer. They already want you, and they are simplying prioritizing people based on factors like fit, faculty fit, how many people are working on your aoi, etc. So no I dont think it is worth it. 

Wait list at Stony Brook. Finally some better news. 

Wait list at Stony Brook. Finally some better news. 

Wait list at Stony Brook. Finally some better news. 

Wait list at Stony Brook. Finally some better news. 

Wait list at Stony Brook. Finally some better news. 

Wait list at Stony Brook. Finally some better news. 

Wait list at Stony Brook. Finally some better news. 

@HomoLudensGood points, it does seem unlikely that they'd want to review new materials from waitlisted applicants. Thanks!

At this point (when you are being waitlisted) they probably aren't going to look at your material any closer. They already want you, and they are simplying prioritizing people based on factors like fit, faculty fit, how many people are working on your aoi, etc. So no I dont think it is worth it. 

LOL thanks ObamaIsGuiltyOfWarCrimes, your words and your name cheered me up. 

LOL thanks ObamaIsGuiltyOfWarCrimes, your words and your name cheered me up. 

0a/0w/8r/1?/13pending
This is awful. This is truly an awful feeling. 

Still no word from Stony Brook! Ohh baby I hope this is a good sign.

Still no word from Stony Brook! Ohh baby I hope this is a good sign.

I think these people are being very imprecise with the term. If elitism is anything that benefits other people than me viz. circumstances outside of our individual control, then maybe they are right. I personally don't play this game of calling people I don't know "elite", "privileged", etc. It makes things too toxic. 
I opt for depression and self-immolation approach rather than resentment of others' success. 

I think you are largely right, there are good application portfolios and there are bad ones. The problem I think is that there is no real way to determine objectively just what it means to have a good one or a bad one. Surely having a LOR from a big name is going to help you get ahead in the running. Studying at an Ivy already gives you an advantage in terms of resources, background, and support that can't be found at a small LAC.
Still, there are people (I will include myself) who have worked really hard to produce a quality sample, having it be read by major people in the field, getting feedback, refining it, presenting it at conferences, have it be pending acceptance to a journal, etc. etc. etc.  and to see all of that work be pointless. Admittedly, my interests are fairly niche (Sample on Kant exegesis that a non-scholar probably won't find interesting). It could very well be that the reason I didn't get accepted is because I went too narrow. Who the hell knows.
Am I bad philosopher? Maybe. However, those of you have done a MA at a school with a PhD program probably know quite well that many PhDs are quite poor philosophers. This is my subjective judgement, but in so far as it is anecdotal it illustrates that putting an emphasis on the quality of the individual and their work is hardly the full story. Not everyone who gets into Harvard Yale and Princeton in one cycle are going to be the next Wittgenstein (though they are probably much closer to him than me). 
Sorry for the ramble.

I think you are largely right, there are good application portfolios and there are bad ones. The problem I think is that there is no real way to determine objectively just what it means to have a good one or a bad one. Surely having a LOR from a big name is going to help you get ahead in the running. Studying at an Ivy already gives you an advantage in terms of resources, background, and support that can't be found at a small LAC.
Still, there are people (I will include myself) who have worked really hard to produce a quality sample, having it be read by major people in the field, getting feedback, refining it, presenting it at conferences, have it be pending acceptance to a journal, etc. etc. etc.  and to see all of that work be pointless. Admittedly, my interests are fairly niche (Sample on Kant exegesis that a non-scholar probably won't find interesting). It could very well be that the reason I didn't get accepted is because I went too narrow. Who the hell knows.
Am I bad philosopher? Maybe. However, those of you have done a MA at a school with a PhD program probably know quite well that many PhDs are quite poor philosophers. This is my subjective judgement, but in so far as it is anecdotal it illustrates that putting an emphasis on the quality of the individual and their work is hardly the full story. Not everyone who gets into Harvard Yale and Princeton in one cycle are going to be the next Wittgenstein (though they are probably much closer to him than me). 
Sorry for the ramble.