<p>Having read the waitlist threads after being accepted, I have a few thoughts:</p>
<p>1) I understand how those on the waitlist feel slighted, but, at the same time, don't slight those who were accepted. Every year, Yale accepts students that Harvard rejects, Princeton waitlists applicants that Stanford admitted early, etc. The point is that all of this plays into a terrible truth in college admissions: the process is not objective. </p>
<p>2) Stellar test scores do not guarantee admission, nor does a demonstrated interest (although both certainly help). And let's face it, who would want to attend a college where the only requirement was a perfect SAT score? Not a very interesting place. </p>
<p>3) And I really really really don't understand why people can assume they were waitlisted because they were overqualified/the admission committee thought they wouldn't matriculate. I told my interviewer from Wash U that I was also considering Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Brown, but that if I was admitted to Wash U, I would consider it along with all my other options because I don't put stock in magazine rankings. For me, that was the truth, and my interviewer actually seemed impressed by it.</p>
<p>I'd welcome other people's opinions.</p>