Part of my problem, I think, is that I like so few people in that way, that when I do, I tend to over-idealise them, perhaps building castles in the air. And the odd thing is, that for all my intensity, I rarely know what do when (if) the other reciprocates. These issues may or may not sound familiar. Whilst I do think there may be something to this situation, I do think that, on my part, the way I deal with it is symptomatic of bigger issues.

I think in any other situation, e.g. if said person was, say, a friend of a friend or fellow student, then I'd have been more direct a while back, and known either way. But this does bring with it a set of rather (and unnecessarily imo) complicated issues. I just have to wait until we meet socially, and take it from there.

I also know that last term, I purposely distanced myself from things I knew she would be going to. Managed it for about 2 months. That could have been read as disinterest. In fact, it was me trying to put things into perspective. If only it worked!

No, I never texted, I sent an e-mail to the usual group, as we meet up for drinks on a fairly regular basis. Her not turning up one week is no big deal.

Nothing to report, as she didn't even turn up! A bit disappointed, but that's the way it goes. Perhaps social next week, or there is my birthday soon, so, as my friend pointed out, that gives me an excuse to text her with a purpose, i.e. inviting her to whatever I arrange.

I don't know about elsewhere, just that in my dept., there is little informality between ugrads/staff-of-any-description. Things changed slightly on the MA, and now, doing a PhD, it's all very informal, going to the pub etc. Probably because people grow up, can deal with such things more maturely, less reprisals. The only exception is with my direct sup..

Is there anywhere else you could feasibly be relocated to? I'd worry about safety (read: stealing) when strange groups start coming in, probably because laptops, ipods etc will be around.

We used to have a store-cupboard, sorry, office, in the dept., got moved across campus to a nice, spacious room accessible to us. Would be unhappy if non-philosophy people could access it. Rumours of going back to store-cupboard next year are filling us with dread.

That's an interesting article, and reiterates the consensus here. I was interested to see that about half of uni's don't have any policy in place, I know mine doesn't. I mean, trying to regulate consenting adults seems silly. But I do understand it with, say, counselling services, the uni. g.p etc.

Possibility of meeting some friends tomo for drinks. Dare I text the lec. tomo. and ask if she wants to join us. Would that be offensive.

Hate that the 200 word limit reduces me to text speak.

Weird. It's almost the opposite in philosophy. It's normal to write: "I want to argue" or "I think that x is wrong for reasons y,z" - we're advised, at undergrad, to get out of the habit of saying things like "This essay states that" - it's all about YOUR thoughts, and hence, you really should be using the first person.

Have you ever just e-mailed the group to say let's go for drinks at such-and-such time, hope to see you there. I've done that a few times, and there has usually been a good turn out. It's normally the case that people want to socialize, but don't want to initiate incase nobody turns up and they look unpopular - but somebody has to take the initiative.

It is a small academic community, as we all know. But I also know academic-couples, and people who have met during their Ph.D. I also know one married staff-once-student-couple. It doesn't raise my radar. The only situation I would think something amiss is if one was involved with the other academically - too much potential for blurring personal/professional.

Yeah I can see why others are considered to have greater need. But with the AHRC, financial need is irrelevant. If it was an award based on that, I could understand it, and that's why I resent the staff-member telling blatant lies in terms of my position in the cohort. When that happens, it makes you wonder why bother, you know.

Alright there. Feel like a chat about it off-board, if you want to of course? Sure we all have a fairly anonymous hotmail, gmail address etc.

I think we have to be prepared for some arbitrariness, but to see it so blatantly, understandably dents your confidence. I'm learning that academia is not, just as it is in other jobs, always based on merit.

You might have a point, i.e., paying my way. I realize I'm in a very fortunate position, and I don't need the AHRC. The person making those remarks knows this.

I thought archaeology/anthropology was ESRC.

I have been rejected twice before, both times, with grade 3 (where 1's and some 2's receive funding). My sup. thought the biggest prob. was with the proposal, so tried to word it better etc this year. Another rejection doesn't make the phd unfeasible. It's just a demoralizing process as we all know.

Who has applied and previously been rejected, and how did the ahrc grade you?

Yeah. I think you have a point, that realistically, the differences between small numbers of people might, well, be small. What I also noticed was that I was also not considered as being a strong phd candidate.

I should point out that my supervisor has a different opinion, and this info. comes from the graduate tutor who has never supervised me for anything. Even worse, is that one of the AHRC panel-assessors is a lec. in our dept (seriously) - it does make me wonder if there will be some internal comments going on regarding funding in this dept.

Mine is philosophy. How about you?