![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
missdianeMr. Lofty McSnobberton responded whining that the proposal I sent him as an example is long like his and boo hoo hoo does he need to chop it down? Well buddy, I sent you that one PER YOUR REQUEST since you're piggybacking off what was started by someone else and it was written in 2017 before the new database with more character limitations. That and if you'd have just READ the instructions on my site that say verbatim in the two applicable sections "This entry in the NIFA Reporting System (NRS) is limited to 8000 characters. You may wish to consider this space limitation when writing this section" you'd have known this but you don't fucking listen. Instead you decided that the instructions that I structured to mirror the new site (that has no instructions since the feds keep fucking with it) was clearly substandard.
With help from Emily to make it more lofty sounding, I went with "The proposal that we send for pre-NIFA-submission review can be lengthier and contain historical and philosophical background for review purposes if you believe it will give project reviewers additional substance to understand what your research goals are and how you will accomplish them. While a more fulsome explanation does allow for the full context to be understood, under the new NIFA guidelines we really must advise that the most successful applications are concise and absent extraneous details. NIFA reviewers are looking for your ability to hone in on the most critical issues to meet your clearly stated goals and objectives."
What I really was thinking "Listen asshole, while I know you adore the scent of your own farts, the feds don't and will see right through your stream of consciousness bullshit and reject it. LISTEN TO ME ALREADY"
I also told him "I send your project out for review" and he came back asking for the links so HE could send it out. No dickweed, it's a regulated process. You don't send your own damned proposal out for review.
With help from Emily to make it more lofty sounding, I went with "The proposal that we send for pre-NIFA-submission review can be lengthier and contain historical and philosophical background for review purposes if you believe it will give project reviewers additional substance to understand what your research goals are and how you will accomplish them. While a more fulsome explanation does allow for the full context to be understood, under the new NIFA guidelines we really must advise that the most successful applications are concise and absent extraneous details. NIFA reviewers are looking for your ability to hone in on the most critical issues to meet your clearly stated goals and objectives."
What I really was thinking "Listen asshole, while I know you adore the scent of your own farts, the feds don't and will see right through your stream of consciousness bullshit and reject it. LISTEN TO ME ALREADY"
I also told him "I send your project out for review" and he came back asking for the links so HE could send it out. No dickweed, it's a regulated process. You don't send your own damned proposal out for review.