catchermiscount

And, while you do want to think about your end results (very much!), it is dangerous to put too much faith in these things. You're not just picking a school; you're picking a you-school dyad. To take an extreme example: we have had people come to Rochester because it is generally known for placing well. You know who gets placed well from Rochester? People that did well at Rochester, which in turn ends up being people that have an aptitude for learning the tools necessary for our kind of work (and, more importantly, like our kind of work). This sort of fit thing is generally well-addressed at the application level and at the acceptance level, but it's not perfectly addressed. So yes, think about placement, but also think about how good and marketable the <insert school here> version of you will look. Also, BFB: thank you for the helpful email about that one thing a few months back. It came through.

I HAVE SOME IDEAS FOR EXAMPLE MAYBE WE COULD *test* ARROW'S THEOREM OR ALSO I WAS KIND OF THINKING THAT, LIKE, VOTING DECISIONS ARE INFLUENCED BY WHAT PARTY YOUR IN

Maybe this is just a function of the dissonance between my perfectionism and lack of aptitude, but even when I think a "paper is close," there's always some new improvement. In this regard, having the deadline (even though you feel good about your progress) is good, as is the opportunity for somebody to make a passing remark that improves the final product.

Can't hurt. It's a good way to tie your hands to ensure that you get lots done on it, even if you don't get amazing feedback.

People in conflict love Peace Science; people in IPE love IPES.

Oh, I (and many others) really like Gambetta's The Sicilian Mafia. Very good read, very readable, makes you better at dinner parties. And I was talking about, like, A Love Supreme Coltrane. But even if you just put on, like, Kind of Blue, you end up going like "OK, Miles is easy to listen to, Cannonball is easy to listen to, Bill Evans is easy to listen to, GOOD GOOD WHAT IS THIS HONKING WITH ALL THE NOTES." I should note that I play way too many notes in an attempt to do the same sort of thing.

See, I tend to be the opposite way. I hate almost everything when I read it at first, and usually the first few times. Then I come to like some of it. It's kind of like John Coltrane or James Joyce.

Very tough question. My favorite book in all of grad school has been Jack Knight's Institutions and Social Conflict. Really great book. While I disagree with much of what he has to say (both substantively and about the nature and role of formal theory), anything by Thomas Schelling (most notably The Strategy of Conflict and Arms and Influence) probably constitutes required reading. For personal reasons, I will be very interested to see where the John Mueller/John Gaddis/Francis Fukuyama/Steven Pinker/Bear Braumoeller conversation on war in the system leads.

This.

Dude, Cigars are totally not-pretentious, except for when other people smoke them.

But do forgive us if we have the occasional moment of self-indulgent bitterness. We don't mean it. Or we do. Either way.

We are become the essence of friendships.

We get fewer applications than a lot of other places, so our committees include only three faculty members. This year, we had two associates and an assistant, and that seems to be a relatively representative group. In five years, I can recall only one "more seasoned" professor working admissions. To build on the point made above, I don't think the three-person committee discusses matters with the other faculty too much.

INCREASE YOUR SIZE! CLICK HERE!

Yes, being very honest, very respectful, and very humble is always a good idea. You guys have information that you need to get, and the faculty members should be doing what they can to get you that info.

I am happy to answer questions about Rochester in PM/email.

The word "analyticist" is hard to say.

Sometimes I think I do IR theory. Then I read the things that people interested in IR theory say.

Utility theory. The weirdest!

I've been pleased with Weebly.

If only there were people out there dedicated to encouraging social scientists to stop with this mean fetishism and move on to meaningful theories of variance. It just feels like we're stuck in a moment that we can't get out of.

Sorry. Was trying to get a model to converge. When I was four years old, I watched my mother kill a spider with a teacosy. Years later, I realised it was not a spider---IT WAS MY UNCLE HAROLD.

I would fail.

Perhaps you folks should become more discriminating in choosing which posts to upvote.

Here in America, it is easy to afford a replacement of that book. Our purchasing power parity is so good.