<p>in other words, you have to check your decision online to find out if you're accepted or you can wait for 3 weesk before you can safely assume you've been rejected (if you didn't check your email?)</p>
<p>is this true? i read in another thread that they're doing this to save $</p>
<p>No! of course you'll get a paper rejection letter. I wonder which Cal student started this rumour. Same goes for waitlisted.</p>
<p>nope no paper rejection. they "eco" friendly.
googol123, dont say anything if u dont kno what ur talking about</p>
<p>Okay fine...that seems to be their new thing this year...even last year they sent out paper reject letters.</p>
<p>cite source?</p>
<p>So apparently this line was in the RD decision email
"We know this is disappointing news to receive; for that reason, and to be environmentally conscious, you will not be sent a paper copy of this letter by mail unless you instruct us otherwise. If you wish to request a copy of this letter by mail, you may do so here."
lol...Dean Shaw's attempt to make up for the single page mailing labels I suppose. :P The bottom line is, you already found out early, and if you treasure a piece of rejection letter so much you can STILL request it.</p>
<p>You won't get a paper copy unless you request it. It says this in the rejection letter:</p>
<p>thanks. i hadn't checked my decision yet cuaes i didnt wnat a digital rejection but i guess now i will</p>
<p>If you were rejected from SCEA, they did send a paper copy... I really have no idea what they're trying to do this year now.
"As a more formal notice of our admission decision, we have mailed you a letter copy of this email."</p>
<p>Well, I guess with the record number of applicants, they're beginning to stop sending rejection letters. UCs like Berkeley and UCLA receive so many applicants that they don't do that, either. It's a smart idea.</p>
<p>Smart?? I think it's rude. Especially when they can't even send out e-mail correctly.</p>
<p>It's rude not to send out rejection letters? That's another 20,000 papers, not to mention envelopes and stamps and lots of ink, to send to people who most likely don't want to see it. It's smart not to send them out now that they have reached a point in the volume of their applicants that it's neither practical nor wise. Notice that they allow you the option of requesting it anyway, which is nice of them.</p>
<p>request a paper letter just to burn it</p>
<p>Yes, it's rude to not follow up with a letter. They sent rejection letters for SCEA. IMO it's an excuse to not spend money. It's also rude and terribly unprofessional to not have e-mails delivered until today when they said decisions were to be up on 3-28 at 3pm. Some people still don't have a decision so they'll have to call tomorrow, that will be even more painful than reading a letter at home.</p>
<p>Oh, im sure stanford can squeeze some money out to send rejection letters, what with the hefty application fee that applicants sent</p>
<p>Sorry, but perhaps Shaw cares about being
[quote]
environmentally conscious
[/quote]
. Ie, paper=dead trees or dead cotton or dead something.</p>
<p>Shaw cares about Shaw. Nothing more, nothing less.</p>
<p>im a really env. person and not getting one by mail ****es me off b/c "env conscious" for stanford is not an excuse. not w/their mailing label method and 9x12 envelopes. thats just taking advantage of ppl's conscience</p>
<p>9*12 envelopes do look nicer though don't you think? For me, it felt much more fulfilling than trying to stuff several pages worth of information into a legal-sized envelope for some of my scholarships. Not to mention that it was only for letters . Your actual application was quite environmentally friendly...online.</p>