2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)

[evolved]

You just proved that the information on the two links was not the same (with 1 exception out of 4 people,as you say).
How did you come to the conclusion that the two links are the same.

Also, regarding the difference between the first link (now deleted) and the OutOfDate link (the one we had): It appears that there isn't any of those who got RANKING and reported their status on both links.

Last year, those with Ranking in one reported also having ranking in the other (ST-LIF, Soc-2018, AK_MSCA). One person (Project798132) had SUBMISSION in the OutOfDate link and EVALUATION in the first link.

So whether or not we use the same link as last year wouldn't make a difference.

[Flocci]

My NCP wrote to Brussels and the response is as follow:

“The results will be communicated in the course of next week”

Based on this it is very unlikely that the results will be launched this Friday. I think, it is likely they will launch by Monday instead.

[fr489]

Hello everyone again

I personally think it's good that we know we should not extent results soon (thanks Bren and others who posted about if before). This constant wait and forum-refreshing state of mind does not seem very good.

I'm not very optimistic because I made a formal mistake in Form B-2 (without exceeding the maximum page numbers). I know what you are going to say: if I was not careful enough, I probably do not deserve the grant! The truth is that I spent a lot of time on the application but I misunderstood something all along, and only noticed after submission. Please have some understanding and don't trash me yet!

This formal mistake would suggest I should not even pass the 70% threshold! And still, I appeared on Ranking. Paradoxically, I need to have the rejection ASAP because my host organisation told me that, if that were the case, we could prepare alternative ways for me to join the research centre.

[megasphaera]

What is this formal mistake, if you can tell. Usually they are more relaxed with form b2.

Hello everyone again

I personally think it's good that we know we should not extent results soon (thanks Bren and others who posted about if before). This constant wait and forum-refreshing state of mind does not seem very good.

I'm not very optimistic because I made a formal mistake in Form B-2 (without exceeding the maximum page numbers). I know what you are going to say: if I was not careful enough, I probably do not deserve the grant! The truth is that I spent a lot of time on the application but I misunderstood something all along, and only noticed after submission. Please have some understanding and don't trash me yet!

This formal mistake would suggest I should not even pass the 70% threshold! And still, I appeared on Ranking. Paradoxically, I need to have the rejection ASAP because my host organisation told me that, if that were the case, we could prepare alternative ways for me to join the research centre.

[evolved]

what was your formal mistake?
Maybe its not too bad

Hello everyone again

I personally think it's good that we know we should not extent results soon (thanks Bren and others who posted about if before). This constant wait and forum-refreshing state of mind does not seem very good.

I'm not very optimistic because I made a formal mistake in Form B-2 (without exceeding the maximum page numbers). I know what you are going to say: if I was not careful enough, I probably do not deserve the grant! The truth is that I spent a lot of time on the application but I misunderstood something all along, and only noticed after submission. Please have some understanding and don't trash me yet!

This formal mistake would suggest I should not even pass the 70% threshold! And still, I appeared on Ranking. Paradoxically, I need to have the rejection ASAP because my host organisation told me that, if that were the case, we could prepare alternative ways for me to join the research centre.

[kassiek]

I think it would depend a lot what your mistake was for you to get under 70. Just having a mistake shouldn’t put you under threshold, especially if your other parts were good.

I think it’s very likely that I screwed up their footnote system. I found it confusing (maybe it was easier for the rest of you to understand). And I still ended up in ranking. I’m taking ranking to be “you didn’t write complete trash”. Whether that gets me the grant or not is to be seen. It was a good experience for writing future grants at the very least!

[sound]

They are not so cruel. Dont fret yet. Part B2 is not a part of the marking except for the CV and if the project is really good they would have contacted you early on to fix issues (such as font size issue etc). And they may give you a chance to fix it at the grant prep stage if something is missing.

Hello everyone again

I personally think it's good that we know we should not extent results soon (thanks Bren and others who posted about if before). This constant wait and forum-refreshing state of mind does not seem very good.

I'm not very optimistic because I made a formal mistake in Form B-2 (without exceeding the maximum page numbers). I know what you are going to say: if I was not careful enough, I probably do not deserve the grant! The truth is that I spent a lot of time on the application but I misunderstood something all along, and only noticed after submission. Please have some understanding and don't trash me yet!

This formal mistake would suggest I should not even pass the 70% threshold! And still, I appeared on Ranking. Paradoxically, I need to have the rejection ASAP because my host organisation told me that, if that were the case, we could prepare alternative ways for me to join the research centre.

[CountZ]

They're the same for everyone with RANKING.

You just proved that the information on the two links was not the same (with 1 exception out of 4 people,as you say).
How did you come to the conclusion that the two links are the same.

Also, regarding the difference between the first link (now deleted) and the OutOfDate link (the one we had): It appears that there isn't any of those who got RANKING and reported their status on both links.

Last year, those with Ranking in one reported also having ranking in the other (ST-LIF, Soc-2018, AK_MSCA). One person (Project798132) had SUBMISSION in the OutOfDate link and EVALUATION in the first link.

So whether or not we use the same link as last year wouldn't make a difference.

[SOC-2018]

Hello everyone again

I personally think it's good that we know we should not extent results soon (thanks Bren and others who posted about if before). This constant wait and forum-refreshing state of mind does not seem very good.

I'm not very optimistic because I made a formal mistake in Form B-2 (without exceeding the maximum page numbers). I know what you are going to say: if I was not careful enough, I probably do not deserve the grant! The truth is that I spent a lot of time on the application but I misunderstood something all along, and only noticed after submission. Please have some understanding and don't trash me yet!

This formal mistake would suggest I should not even pass the 70% threshold! And still, I appeared on Ranking. Paradoxically, I need to have the rejection ASAP because my host organisation told me that, if that were the case, we could prepare alternative ways for me to join the research centre.

As the evaluators' assessment is essentially based on the first section of the proposal, I think it is not so surprising if your proposal reaches the threshold of 70 (provided that the first section is really well-written)! However, I'm afraid your mistake may cost you the fellowship because it is too competitive! but who knows?! keep your fingers crossed!

[danGFSOC]

No limitation

Does anybody know if there is any limitation in terms of the number of times an applicant could submit an MSCA proposal (eg. maximum 3 or 4 times)?