Great! thanks! It is my second try and I was thinking of reapplying if I failed again!
2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
Well B-2 is important but I can't imagine a "fatal error" in the B-2 part, even a formal one. Maybe, for GF, only forgetting the letter of commitment can make your application not eligible. But it is good to have a so strong support from your research centre.
fr489 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 30, 2019 4:53 pmHello 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.
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
That sounds painful! I may reapply a second time but I can’t imagine torturing myself a third time!
Good luck I hope you get it this time and don’t need to apply again!
Good luck I hope you get it this time and don’t need to apply again!
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
Either the information is the same in the two links or not. Subdividing the sample into more and more subcategories doesn’t help. Your assertion would need a much higher sample to validate. Mine needs only a single observation being different between the two links, which is what you also saw.
CountZ wrote: ↑Wed Jan 30, 2019 5:04 pmThey're the same for everyone with RANKING.
evolved wrote: ↑Wed Jan 30, 2019 4:51 pmYou 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.
CountZ wrote: ↑Wed Jan 30, 2019 4:34 pmAlso, 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.
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
perseverance and patience are the key to success in academia! (and of course a bit of luck! )
Last edited by SOC-2018 on Wed Jan 30, 2019 5:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
I completely agree with this. I think the rest of the proposal was decent, especially for a first timer, but I assume one cannot afford minor errors like these.
If you are all curious, I exceeded the one-page limit for the participating organisation, in a very silly way (changing the font size would have been enough to keep it at one page). I misread the instructions and remained convinced all along that the one-page limit applied to something else. Mea culpa. Thus I expected (even wanted) a very early rejection that would allow me to find alternatives with the host organisation.
If you are all curious, I exceeded the one-page limit for the participating organisation, in a very silly way (changing the font size would have been enough to keep it at one page). I misread the instructions and remained convinced all along that the one-page limit applied to something else. Mea culpa. Thus I expected (even wanted) a very early rejection that would allow me to find alternatives with the host organisation.
SOC-2018 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 30, 2019 5:08 pmAs 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!fr489 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 30, 2019 4:53 pmHello 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.
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
You were tortured with this? No way they are going to reject you based on this insignificant error. Most likely they will not even notice.
fr489 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 30, 2019 5:22 pmI completely agree with this. I think the rest of the proposal was decent, especially for a first timer, but I assume one cannot afford minor errors like these.
If you are all curious, I exceeded the one-page limit for the participating organisation, in a very silly way (changing the font size would have been enough to keep it at one page). I misread the instructions and remained convinced all along that the one-page limit applied to something else. Mea culpa. Thus I expected (even wanted) a very early rejection that would allow me to find alternatives with the host organisation.
SOC-2018 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 30, 2019 5:08 pmAs 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!fr489 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 30, 2019 4:53 pmHello 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.
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
I think they are instructed to notice, precisely because it is so competitive. In any case I will report my score here so that we all learn from it and avoid similar future mistakes
Last edited by fr489 on Wed Jan 30, 2019 5:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
Relax. They won't even notice...
evolved wrote: ↑Wed Jan 30, 2019 5:24 pmYou were tortured with this? No way they are going to reject you based on this insignificant error. Most likely they will not even notice.
fr489 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 30, 2019 5:22 pmI completely agree with this. I think the rest of the proposal was decent, especially for a first timer, but I assume one cannot afford minor errors like these.
If you are all curious, I exceeded the one-page limit for the participating organisation, in a very silly way (changing the font size would have been enough to keep it at one page). I misread the instructions and remained convinced all along that the one-page limit applied to something else. Mea culpa. Thus I expected (even wanted) a very early rejection that would allow me to find alternatives with the host organisation.
SOC-2018 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 30, 2019 5:08 pm
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!
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
I am not sure I would even want to "win" a fellowship that an excellent proposal would be rejected because I had 1.5 page for my institution instead of 1 page. AT WORSE they will disregard what you have written in the extra half of the page as they do for the part B-1. As simple as that.