<p>There is no proved correlation between later waves and rejections. It is just a misunderstanding that has been created by the overanalyzing of this small sample of students that write on CC. </p>
<p>I know that all the people from my school got in "later" than the first wave last year. It may be geographical because it seems as though kids in the same school havent or have received letters. Kids in my school haven't received any sort of letters yet kids in my friends school in NY have all heard. (Yes, there were rejections and waitlisted students)</p>
<p>It is clear that all the students on cc are overqualified or underqualified which leads to the skewed reading of the trend.</p>
<p>I think people who keep stating that "CC'ers are much stronger applicants than the general population" to refute informal statistics on this site are neglecting the fact that Carnegie Mellon's applicant pool is ALSO, as a whole, much stronger academically than the general population</p>
<p>Oh give me a break. If you look at the second wave RD decisions from a year ago, there are 2 straight pages of reject and waitlist. Not even a single accept. It would be a coincidence if the majority turned out to be reject. But not a single accept? I don't think that happened by chance.</p>
<p>Now I wont say that's what's going to happen this year. But ignoring the obvious truth is just stupid.</p>
<p>They could have any system they want. Who is to say that CC is Law and that if you are in the second wave, you will automatically be rejected. There is always that possibility, but that is like me saying "everyone from a certain school will be rejected". There is no substance to that accusation. CC has probably 200 of the 23000+ applicants that apply and like I said, it is just a coincidence. Unless someone from the admissions department clearly states that this is the system they use, it can't be proved. </p>
<p>Also, mike1123 is correct. There were a couple of acceptances.</p>