<p>garland,</p>
<p>Ahhhhhh. I see now. I'm the one in the red on that one. :)</p>
<p>In the end, it seems like this lady is like a midget trying to stop a wave. I don't think it's possible to reverse the trend, it's just natural competition</p>
<p>"everyone was so focused on the acceptance tubes, that the poor reject letters got overlooked in the shuffle."</p>
<p>Interesteddad, what you don't seem to get is that your attitude towards schools that are often seen as more desireable (or prestigious) than your beloved Swathmore leaks out all over the place (you're always very benevolent towards schools that don't threaten the hallowed spot of your d's school) . While your explanation clarifies what was murkey in your previous posts, your inability to hide this negative attitude towards schools like MIT is clear once again in your last comment.</p>
<p>MIT can be very traditional, despite its strength in sci/tech. Sure, a lot of other schools may have online courses or do lectures with powerpoints - the vast majority of my professors have stuck to using blackboards, and all of my classes have been in a classroom with the professor right in front of you. Just because it's easier or because it's newer doesn't always make it better, and no place knows that better than MIT. We love new things - new things are great. But sometimes, the old stuff can be just as exciting.</p>
<p>I remember checking my email during my TA period and finding out that I was deferred from Harvard. I was rather upset during the rest of school that day, and I didn't like that one bit. I'm glad that my MIT acceptance just sat pleasantly in my mailbox at home, waiting for me, instead of throwing off my emotional balance in the middle of class.</p>
<p>Also, I think my class was somewhere in the middle of the transition between paper to electronic applications - I for one did all of my applications by paper. I got all of my UC notifications online - for UC Berkeley, some of my friends and I checked in the library computers at the same time. Three of us got in, two didn't. I didn't know what to say to the one who'd placed his hopes on Berkeley - what would you have said? "I'm sorry, you'll like UCSD just as well?" So fake it's not even worth trying. We ended up joking about the rejection page saying "ADMISSION DENIED" in an attempt to lighten the mood, but not only could I tell that he felt absolutely awful, but I also felt terrible for him. It not only makes the ones who don't get in feel worse, but it also spoils the mood for the ones who do get in. It's also very hard to not check when you know it's there online, so that's not even a valid alternative.</p>
<p>Getting into and choosing a college isn't a rushed process, nor is it a public process. It shouldn't be done in a group setting like that; we shouldn't have done it in a group setting like that. I'm thankful MIT did paper only. I'm glad I first got to celebrate my MIT acceptance with my family. I'm glad I didn't have to congratulate someone else getting into my dream school immediately after finding out I didn't. Just because you had to wait an extra day or two isn't reason for anyone to have to be put through that - having even a few hours for it to sink in first before having to face classmates and give congratulations helps. College admissions decide your entire future - one day or two in comparison is nothing.</p>
<p>(ps: haven't actually read this entire thread, but tubes? What tubes? All I got was a big flat envelope with a folder inside containing info I needed. Tubes would've been fun.)</p>
<p>"I remember checking my email during my TA period and finding out that I was deferred from Harvard. I was rather upset during the rest of school that day, and I didn't like that one bit. I'm glad that my MIT acceptance just sat pleasantly in my mailbox at home, waiting for me, instead of throwing off my emotional balance in the middle of class."</p>
<p>Shikari, if the decision had been reversed, you probably would like the online delivery system better. Same thing for MIT mail delays ... if for some reason, the TUBES had been sent by the lowest cost snail mail to save 3 pennies, NOBODY would have been complaining. </p>
<p>As far as opening an email or checking on a website that delivers the decision, there is no obligation to do it in a public space. We can debate forever what is the best way to deliver BAD news ... and there are not many. </p>
<p>I for one believe that the best systems should have redundancy built into them and include an online delivery AND a confirming letter. Schools that answer to 2 or 3 times the volume of applications of MIT do not seem to have a problem with the delivery. For some reason, I have to believe that such systems do not have to be developed from scratch. </p>
<p>I also happen to think that all the fancy wrapping and confetti are quite ridiculous and a waste of money. I can understand the use of Fedex boxes because of its security in delivery, but the tube wasn't that great of an idea and far from being novel. I really, really like what MIT is trying to do with its communications as long as it comes from their PEOPLE. The typical format of their brochures is so different that it is irritating. For example, why do they have to have that PT Barnum oversized viewbook that does not fit in anything? Have you ever seen the pictures on the financial aid brochure? Good that you get it only after being accepted! The firm hired by MIT is surely not earning its fees. I understand that MIT is trying to convey its uniqueness and quirkiness, but I feel that money could be spent a lot better by erring on the side of being reasonable. </p>
<p>If MIT had been true to itself, it could have posted the decision on its website with a real strong encryption on the 12th, let the leet MiT'ers spend a few nights trying to crack the encryption, give a few hints every night, and finally release it on the 15th. </p>
<p>THAT would have been MiT'esque!</p>
<p>Actually, I was also very pleased with MIT's paper acceptance, since it meant I got to celebrate with my family instead of having to go through an entire day of school before being able to tell them (what cell phone? didn't have'em back then). Already covered how being accepted online can be dampered anyway, so bah on that. People treat things differently. Also, if people are so anxious that a few extra days of waiting is SO unbearable, how can you reasonably argue that there is no obligation to check online if you don't want to? Everyone WANTS to know - the ones who don't get in regret it only afterwards. Unfortunately, you only learn that after you've already checked - oops, too late. It's easy to SAY that there's no obligation - it's a different story when you're actually placed in that position. [edit: see above post. =P] </p>
<p>Now, the problem with the little hacking plan is that our finals started today, and everything for classes without finals was due on the 14th, including many final lab projects. I for one certainly wouldn't have wasted my time with hacking that. However, that's not to say that no one would try. Someone managed to set up a program to steal some dozens of kerberos login/password combos, then emailed them to IST just to show them that their supposedly incredibly secure system was not secure at all. That system needs to be more secure than any website for checking admissions ever needs to be - those passwords contain access to a lot of personal information. Hints would be unnecessary for the ones who really wanted in.</p>
<p>Oh, and for the lack of aestheticism - MIT itself isn't very pretty and doesn't really fit in anywhere, so I find that to be, well, quite fitting, actually.</p>
<p>Donemom:</p>
<p>MIT and a small liberal arts college have nothing to do with each other. It's like soccer and water polo. None of that has anything to do with MIT's "fubar" on the mailing.</p>
<p>What I wrote is exactly what happened. The admissions office hauled the stuff over to the mail room. The mail room understood that the tubes had to go 1st class metered mail. For whatever reason, the mail room did not understand that the trays of envelopes had to go the same way. The envelops got "overlooked" in either the giving or the receiving of the instructions. Somewhere in the communication, the tubes and the envelopes were perceived to have different priorities.</p>
<p>Shikari, I meant "if the decisions had been reversed" meaning the deferral and admit came from the school using the "other" delivery system. </p>
<p>The obligation was ... an obligation to check in a public space. Again, we can debate this forever and it is entirely subjective. I hope you agree that the schools that sent different type of mailers do not leave much surprise. Some of the FAT envelopes have congratulations printed on them ... if the differenec from a standard envelope was not sufficient. The best way to find out the acceptances in your neighborhood is probably to slip a twenty dollar bill to the mailman. The USPS guy must know the contents of the school envelopes from a tenth of a mile away. :)</p>
<p>I'm sorry, I still don't get what you're saying. I was deferred from MIT EA and accepted RD; I also preferred the privacy of the deferral letter, if that's what you meant?</p>
<p>Obligation to check in a public space? I think I was referring to "the desire to check as soon as possible, wherever that was, public or private." For some people, it happens to be posted when they're at home. For others, it happens to be at school. Maybe just uniform waiting on everyone's behalf, for the sake of the few, is justified. Maybe that's just my opinion. But I see saving the few that kind of pain to be worth it, even at the cost of the anxiety of the many.</p>
<p>Sure, not a lot is left to surprise, but I'm not talking about a matter of privacy FOREVER - people find out, and that's OK. It's the first few hours immediately after a deferral or a rejection that I personally found to be the hardest.</p>
<p>interesteddad - I'm curious - exactly what does that matter? Slipups occur; they occurred in the company where I interned this summer, they occur at MIT, they occur everywhere. MIT's not perfect, and the mail system is certainly far from it.</p>
<p>interesteddad, there is a substantive and tonal difference between saying
[quote]
Somewhere in the communication, the tubes and the envelopes were perceived to have different priorities.
[/quote]
and saying
[quote]
everyone was so focused on the acceptance tubes, that the poor reject letters got overlooked in the shuffle.
[/quote]
Surely you can see that, and see what people are trying politely to point out?</p>
<p>In the end, does any of this debate over MIT's admisssions mistake this past week really matter? Yes, it happened, and many people got hurt because of it at MIT and elsewhere. But that's that. Nothing we do or say can change what happened, and nothing we do or say can change how MIT feels about admissions. They're going to do what they feel is the best method for notification. We can discuss what happened, but that's it. I don't know. I just don't see where this is going nor what good this debate will do, and I don't think we should be critiquing how they run admissions right now. In my opinion, I think we should just let it go for now in order to let everyone (applicants following this thread as well as the MIT reps.) heal. All of you can feel free to disagree with me, but that is my opinion. </p>
<p>I have other issues on my mind right now, which are (in retrospect) unimportant and shouldn't bother me in the end but are somehow making me want to cry. (I hate that.) Those issues need to come first for me so I really can't be worrying about this.</p>
<p>No, I can't really see the difference.</p>
<p>I feel awful for Marilee Jones and the whole staff. I think what they do with their blogs is very cool and they are serious about trying to put a human face on admissions.</p>
<p>It's just one of those "Murphy's Law" ironies. Write about treating college applicants in a more humane way and the next thing you know a mailing room snafu makes you look cold and heartless.</p>
<p>This the paragraph I addressed in my "there is no obligation to chech the notice in a public place. </p>
<p>
[quote]
I got all of my UC notifications online - for UC Berkeley, some of my friends and I checked in the library computers at the same time. Three of us got in, two didn't. I didn't know what to say to the one who'd placed his hopes on Berkeley - what would you have said? "I'm sorry, you'll like UCSD just as well?" So fake it's not even worth trying. We ended up joking about the rejection page saying "ADMISSION DENIED" in an attempt to lighten the mood, but not only could I tell that he felt absolutely awful, but I also felt terrible for him. It not only makes the ones who don't get in feel worse, but it also spoils the mood for the ones who do get in. It's also very hard to not check when you know it's there online, so that's not even a valid alternative.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>As far as reversing the decisions, I meant ... what if MIT pleasant letter was a deferral but Harvard cold email started with "Congratulations". </p>
<p>
[quote]
I'm glad that my MIT acceptance just sat pleasantly in my mailbox at home, waiting for me, instead of throwing off my emotional balance in the middle of class. </p>
<p>and</p>
<p>I remember checking my email during my TA period and finding out that I was deferred from Harvard.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>And I've already addressed both, so there's not much point to saying the same things again.</p>
<p>interesteddad, I see quite a difference in the connotation of the two quotes. One makes it seem as if the defer/reject letters were just pushed aside and seen as "unimportant"; the other says that there was equal chance for the admit letters to have been sent late as the defer/reject. I think they teach this in AP English Lit and test it on the SAT reading comp.</p>
<p>While you may disagree with interesteddad, let's be fair to him. The context of the entire paragraph from which that one sentence was lifted makes it abundantly clear that he did not believe there was an equal chance at all.</p>
<p>Exactly. My premise was that there was not an equal chance. An equal chance would have been ten trays of envelopes, one containing acceptances, the others containing bad news letters.</p>
<p>This wasn't anyone's "fault". Nobody wanted the mailing to happen this way. It was just one of those things...a series of unintended consequences that adds up to a given result. </p>
<p>The people involved were so focused on the task of hand-stamping the tubes (the adcoms were justifiably proud of the tubes, the folks in the mail room probably were thinking, "what a pain in the you know what") that they failed to appreciate the implications of the standard institutional policy on the routing of the envelopes. </p>
<p>It's not like Marilee Jones consciously decided to save a dime postage on each bad news letter. I'm sure she had no idea the letters would be routed to an outside vendor for non-profit bulk-rate sorting and delayed for four days. If she had known, there is no way her staff would have spent the next four days assuring everyone that all the letters had been mailed at the same time. They believed that to be true.</p>
<p>Interestedad, with each of your successive posts, you've softened your tone and made it clear that this wasn't due to a thoughtless, hard-hearted admissions staff. If your earlier posts had sounded like this, you wouldn't have had to post so many subsequent explanations/clarifications.</p>
<p>"I think they teach this in AP English Lit and test it on the SAT reading comp"</p>
<p>Shikari, I believe that this comment was uncalled for. Your replies in this thread indicate that polishing reading comprehension skills should be on your agenda a lot more than on Interesteddad's. If it was a veiled attempt at humor or sarcasm, you missed the mark by a mile.</p>
<p>Quote texas137:
"For a "math kid", a 15 hour problem set is their idea of fun, and is how they choose to spend their free time. School gets in the way of what they truly enjoy doing, which is math. So it's more likely to come out during the summer. Math = play for these kids. I'm sure it is different for other kids. But then, isn't knowing which kind of kid an applicant is part of matching them to the best college?"</p>
<p>If a kid thinks math problems are fun, he can do them till his heart's content. But here's the snag, college admissions are telling us he is better than the kid who spends his summer hanging out.</p>
<p>Also, just because someone enjoys doing math problems doesn't mean they will be successful. The kid who messes around at the beach may still be a better math student</p>
<p>
[quote]
Also, just because someone enjoys doing math problems doesn't mean they will be successful. The kid who messes around at the beach may still be a better math student
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Huh? Sez who? "May" is a real weasel word. How do you know? Texas is not talking about a kid adding 2+2 all summer long. I'll bet that the 16 year-old who recently solved the Dirichlet problem did not spend his summer "hanging out."</p>
<p>And what is meant by successful? Academically? at MIT or Caltech? There are lots of beaches around MIT and Caltech, right.</p>