<p>While the wait has been tough for the Yale hopefuls, we were once comforted by the Stanford applicants sharing the same long wait. </p>
<p>Fortunately for our West Coast friends, Stanford e-mailed their decisions to them tonight. I was really hoping for the same luck!</p>
<p>Darn. :/</p>
<p>Hm, but I've been trying to access my Eli account and it won't load. </p>
<p>
[quote]
The server at secure2.its.yale.edu is taking too long to respond.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Is it my computer, or is everyone having this problem?</p>
<p>WHAT??? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!
that's so not fair....Now we ARE the latest top school of all to get results.</p>
<p>If there's any more delay than 6:00pm eastern time, I SHALL go mad.</p>
<p>Wow. Stanford already sent theirs?
That's a cool (or not so much...) surprise.</p>
<p>well if its any consolation, a good friend of mine is hearing from MIT on Monday at 9pm. With any luck, we'll hear from Yale hours before then....</p>
<p>omg! </p>
<p>look at the the decisions thread for Stanford EA...so many awesome applicants rejected (not even atleast deferred...it's absolutely ridiculous!!!)</p>
<p>Yale...please do NOT pull a stanford...</p>
<p>Holy ****, Stanford slaughtered them... and you thought Dartmouth was bad? Stanford flat out rejected perfect stats...</p>
<p>hear, hear rb3. i looked at the forum just now and my jaw dropped. 2400/800/800 SAT/II scorers rejected like nothing. so many impressive candidates with intel awards, math/debate awards, etc obliterated by stanford SCEA.</p>
<p>man.</p>
<p>O
M
G</p>
<p>yeah, it's more or less over for me.</p>
<p>What...the...****</p>
<p>That old joke about having to cure cancer may actually be coming true. I've been frantically trying to call my Stanford hopeful friend to see if he got in. Only a voicemail...</p>
<p>I hope Yale is more merciful!</p>
<p>seriously, stanford KILLED its applicants. and here i thought college would be merciful after reading the columbia board...</p>
<p>I don't know why this comes as a surprise. How long has that statistic about 1/2 of 2400's being rejected from Harvard been going around? I think we get way too wrapped up in scores and forget that it basically serves as a threshold. </p>
<p>I doubt there's any real difference between a 2100 and a 2400 except for showing who is better at writing the SAT. The higher you go, the statistically higher chance you have but I have the feeling that the benefit is marginal in the grand scheme of things. How many hours have we invested for an extra fifty points?</p>
<p>CC is a valuable resource, but it's misleading in many ways. Simply put, we think we're better than we are. We're only exposed to those at the very top, because why bother posting if you have a 1900 SAT and are constantly told that you're not competitive and not going to get in? And yet, people from every range get pruned when it comes to the top schools.</p>
<p>We've applied, what's done is done, but I don't think SAT's or any one EC or any one essay will make or break your application. The more I reflect on the process I come to realize that it truly is a holistic process.</p>
<p>Word up.</p>
<p>:]</p>
<p>^ I concur wholeheartedly.</p>
<p>If Yale pulls a Stanford I'll be destroyed.</p>
<p>Some kid that was like 2380 SAT, 3 perfect SAT IIs, captain of EVERYTHING, 1st prize winner of EVERYTHING was rejected. not even deferred.</p>
<p>That being said, what is the official website I have to go to to learn my fate?</p>
<p>
Yea.... about that......</p>
<p><em>coughWilliamscough</em></p>
<p>Dude have you seen the Stanford board? We aren't just talking applicants with immaculate scores; we're talking applicants with immaculate scores and excellent awards/ECs getting rejected. Rejected. I thought they rejected early only the kids they had 100% confidence they would reject RD.</p>
<p>@DangerDave</p>
<p>All your questions can be answered here: Early</a> Action Information | News | Office of Undergraduate Admissions</p>
<p>You guys do realize that after a point nobody gives a quantitative damn about SAT scores or GPA's or even EC's. It just works down to whoever makes the most compelling case. An application is a story, not a list of achievements...</p>
<p>@ Cato</p>
<p>Yeah, I get that. I don't want to be abrasive because I understand that it's an especially tough time for those who have been rejected, but seeing as how we're all tense as **** it's probably best to step back and take an objective look.</p>
<p>The top universities aren't looking for just excellence in the narrow way we have defined it on CC. There's something to be said about creating a class that is diverse, that has personality, and quirks. I don't think that a cohesive class is necessarily formed simply by taking accomplished students. There are many factors that we can't really assess on CC, namely the essays and teacher recommendations. EVERYONE is going to think that their essays are unique and wonderful. But here's the thing, on CC the conventional wisdom is "If two candidates are similar enough, the one with higher GPA/SAT is going to get in." I think a more reasonable way to examine it is "If two candidates are similar enough, which would I rather have a conversation with?" </p>
<p>It's all moot now anyway.</p>