mmk
-
Posts
37 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by mmk
-
-
except, didn't someone from aerospace get the award?
fortytwo did:
Just FYI, you're not being trolled. I got an acceptance email around 3:30 as well (for aerospace).
-
[quote name=hello!
' timestamp='1303072002' post='246411]I wonder if the award emails were actually suppose to go out on Tuesday, April 19, 2011, but someone accidentally sent them on Saturday...
-
Yeah, this thread seems a lot nastier than the NSF thread. Winning is frowned upon and anyone who posts an acceptance is a "troll."
I think you guys are misunderstanding the motivation of the suspicion of several people in this thread...before drawing conclusions about the 'nastiness' of the thread, a rereading of some of the discussion earlier on may be helpful...
-
Spoofing the header is what spammers do all the time so you can't trace them though. Still, who knows. At that point I think we are getting a little Looney Tunes though.
This is true...but it would be the best evidence we could get up to this point, short of the acceptance list being posted or everyone finally receiving some sort of email.
-
Who says they didn't spoof the header? Or just photoshop it? Go, go gadget conspiracy theory!
Maybe I'm being misunderstood. I'm not talking about the email subject line. I'm talking about the part of the email that traces its path from sender to receiver. If you have gmail, open any email, view the drop down menu immediately to the right of the 'Reply' button, and choose 'Show original'. Slightly more difficult to fake that, I think.
-
Haha, independently, right? We set up a board to examine and compare private submissions of supposed headers?
Sure, why not. It'll pass the time. :-)
-
Even better than a pic of the email might be the header of said email from more than one supposed awardee...
-
Says the person with his first post and who only joined the party AFTER his/her alleged acceptance. Something doesn't add up...
Many people just keep tabs on the forum and are not active. Doesn't necessarily mean he's lying...
-
-
Uh I'm having a weird problem here. I go to log into the awards page and the email and password that Firefox has saved on this computer (from before presumably) don't work. When I go to reset the password it says my email address is not found. When I search my email I see that I only have one email from the NDSEG people and it's a reminder for supplemental materials. I am pretty sure I submitted the application... does anyone have a confirmation email from application submission? Seriously if I forgot to actually submit the application I'm going to punch myself in the nuts. I remember submitting the essays and everything... Can anyone else reset their password?
I also only have the supplemental materials reminder, though I can log into the apply page just fine and see that my application was submitted...if an award was not actually made, I wouldn't expect to be able to log into the awards page. But as jendoly pointed out, their system could still be in transition.
-
This is a little frustrating. What rhyme or reason is there to the order in which the announcements are being given out? Or is there even one...
-
I'm curious to know why more people aren't posting...granted, we are much fewer than NSF, but still...
-
Pics or it didn't happen.
-
Well. This was awfully anti-climactic...
-
So now that the govt is open for business we should definitely be good for Friday right...right??
If anyone calls/emails, please post!!
"Open for business" and "on schedule" are two very different things, lol.
-
the person said within a week, which means, within a week. i doubt they would have told anyone such a definite answer if there was still uncertainty
I doubt a definite-sounding answer necessarily implies certainty given the ones answering the phones likely are not determining the budget or deciding policy of any sort. That being said, we might have on our hands a case similar to the 2009 announcements, as I think has been noted several times before. If NSF does make announcements next week *fingers crossed*, it might very well be only the first of several rounds until our beloved Congress sorts out the budget dispute and NSF knows exactly how much money it has for the GRFP...
In summary:
- repatriate and dendarii917
-
1
-
1
-
Tuesday, April 5, 9:30 AM EST
Frankly, I'd like to see them announce this Friday, being April Fool's day and all...oh, to add insult to injury!
-
I'm less tense about NSF and NDSEG not making clear when they'll release results and more tense that the DOE SCGF still hasn't made clear when they'll open the application (also delayed due to the budget). Just open it already or cancel the competition for this year! *sniffle*
+1
-
I also applied for the NDSEG fellowship. Does anyone know if that is awarded about the same time as the NSF?
There is a that you should definitely keep an eye on.
To answer your question: both fellowships promise announcements in early April. In the linked NDSEG thread, however, one person contacted the office associated with the NDSEG and found they are waiting on DoD for something, presumably information regarding this fiscal year, which is, of course, still up in the air in Congress. NSF has given no indication (at least by the information presented in this present thread) that their announcement dates are dependent upon the current budget debate.
-
I wonder what is worse.....human professors or the BCS algo as the panel.....
Oh, it's definitely...hmm....a toss up.
-
thanks. I agree. I dont believe it makes a significant change in the statistics of chosen students, however, knowing the federal government and "hints" they place in the wording leads me to believe it is not completely merit based. The question still remains, to what extent is there an agenda for the reviewers? I would assume pre-review would sway decisions too much, post review for boarderline cases would be more appropriate. Unless somone here joins the panel in 20 years, I doubt we will ever know.
Haha, yes. But even if someone were to join the panel and learn how the system is setup, would we really know even then? As you said, the agendas of the reviewers must be considered. Who can know these except perhaps the ones with the agendas, and how can we be sure they would not have an agenda in answering one way or another your questions regarding their agenda, or that they really even know what their agenda is? It's a dizzying question and is yet another without a satisfying answer, imho, at least until AI begins to replace the review panels (enter: another interesting discussion). Hopefully the system as a whole is designed to smooth out the distribution of agendas and biases, and it does seem to do this fairly well.
-
It seems to me up for interp. Are they saying that the GRFP wants the diversity and geographic distribution for broad impact? or are the outright saying they will, as stated in the first quote, give preferential treatment to those in less represented areas? *food for thought*
Food for thought indeed. I would take the publication's statements regarding the GRFP review process with a grain of salt since it's dated, but it's insightful nonetheless. Again though, without statements detailing the exact nature of the algorithms used, it's difficult to say much other than that gender, ethnicity, etc. are auxiliary criteria that are possibly significant for (probably) a minority of applicants. At least that's what I get out of the article...it's somewhat unsatisfying. You bring up a good point.
-
So Ive read alot online about how the GRFP gives weight to minorities, women, the disabled, and geographic location. Does anyone know if they go into the review process with that criteria in mind for a certain applicant, or is everyone on the same playing field and the "other" factors are considered for boarder line cases once everyone has been considered?
Officially, the GRFP awards fellowships on the basis of merit in two areas. You can read about it here. I'd be interested to see a source cited for the "gives weight to..." statement. Membership in those groups cannot by any reasonable definition be classed under merit. Perhaps what you are referring to is NSF's open, significant encouragement of the participation of those groups in the fellowship competition, as well as research proposals that facilitate the participation of those groups in science and engineering (i.e. "broader impacts"...see previous link).
I know of no place where the GRFP states the weight of (non)membership in those groups on your application's competitiveness or in how it is evaluated (if anybody does, I would be interested to see...). Until shown otherwise, I think we must assume all are on equal footing, with decisions by the GRFP based on intellectual merit and broader impacts.
-
Actually, based on past years, the ones who pick up the phone seem to just be some contracted agency or perhaps they're part of the NSF but are not really guys with any inside info. They don't seem to know anything except for the basics that can be found on the NSF websites so you're not going to learn anything unusual through calling. So when they say they have no information about it, that's exactly what they mean: they really don't know because the NSF hasn't told them.
Unsurprising. But then, I wouldn't really consider something as significant as the budget debate delaying award announcements as unusual, at least in the sense that it's a common concern and many people will have questions about it.
NDSEG fellowship
in The Bank
Posted
Lies, especially after accusing them of trolling...lol