Post #1571925

Throughout my limited time in science, I've gotten a lot of no's. I used to ask for the notes and rationales when I didn't get a grant, but over time, I realized like their reasons are usually made up to back-rationalize what is actually a gut decision by each member of the evaluation group. I was told as a grad student to re-apply for some funding when I had some more publications, but then someone else with no publication record got the award. I was told my postdoc project idea wouldn't work but then someone else was funded for a postdoc doing a very similar study design. I agonized over my CV formatting and letters when I applied for TT jobs, thinking I was missing something, but then I saw some other people's materials and realized my stuff was better. So basically I've stopped caring what they think, and they can take it or leave it lol. I no longer ask for their notes and if they provide them, I take everything with a huge handful of salt. There are a couple exceptions to this rule. For example, I thought the selection process for the Marie Curie postdoctoral fellowship (which I didn't get) was quite transparent, quantitative and rational. But usually I think the funders are actually making their decision based on vibes, and all the stuff on top is window dressing.