pot

Well, Melian I disagree with you. But at least you engaged me somewhat. Much better than cartoons and memes and the old "hater/troll" chestnut.

So somebody has apparently owned up to that upburst. As if I would have known based on the GRE alone! A confession: Unlike every other human ever, I am jealous when someone has failed to achieve a goal. Perhaps instead of pyschoanalysis, a better idea would be to consider whether or not 160 is minimally acceptable for entrance to a Classics PhD. I would say not. Perhaps you disagree, but given the relatively modest study investment that can improve one's score, I think this not unreasonable. Given this consideration, there are perhaps non-meritorious factors at work.

I could care less for either their GRE Or rejection. However I do care about the dismissive cry from one whose limited information offered, i.e. the GRE, gives a plausible reason to understand the rejection. In such a case the rejection should be accepted with a stiff upper lip.

Sigh, check the results page if you think I am making something out if thin air. Accusations of trolling are often the refuge of someone without a legitimate counterpoint. And yet if I am throwing punches at a "strawman" (not how the term is to be employed, btw) then no one should get upset at "punches" thrown at a non-existent person. I'll leave you all alone now.

Yes. Block me. Academia is a friendly place of encouragement and cooperation, where all agree. I am sure you will find this to be the case. I wonder if you think Bs should be As, on the grounds that this is "quibbling" over a few points Somehow it does not surprise me you "have no idea." The person addressed knows exactly who it addressed to. No claim was ever made that GRE= scholarly potential, only that it is the easiest area to improve one's application and a quite desirable objective measure to add to the mix, to counter the subjective aspects like LORs and SOPs (which I have no objection to.)

"Numerous factors" : chief among them, linguistic and verbal comprrehension. But this is probably too much to ask for. "Arguably" it is the easiest (and most objective) of the elements in an application to improve oneself in.

Not "whatever." It should be well within the prospect of horizons for a so-called Classicist to score above at least the 90th percentile verbal. If one cannot leap over a rather modest 160, perhaps the blame is in oneself.

All, I have nothing substantive to contribute. But in this time of application season stress, I thought you might enjoy the @LeiterReports Twitter account for a light-hearted take on Leiter's stranglehold on the profession.