Sorry Zutterfly, that's rubbish that you're having to wait so long for feedback. I hope they get back to you soon.

I've messed up lots of interviews in my time - it's an awful feeling. Fingers crossed for both of you - I thought my PhD interview was catastrophic and was amazed when I was offered the place!

pm133, I think, was the one who said the OP was sexist, but his most aggressive post appears to have been removed.

It just seems a shame that a post requesting support has met with such hostility - demonstrating part of the problem with academic culture, I think.

It's a shame you've had such negative, aggressive responses here, jojo. I don't have the time or inclination to engage with these arguments yet again, except to say that it's clearly documented that there isn't a level playing field, and this is why we have initiatives like Athena Swan (which I understand, from talking to academics, isn't making much difference yet). Anyway, to go back to the point of your post, and if you're still around, happy to take part in a supportive thread.

I agree, the uncertainty of it all is awful! I am always being asked by family members when it 'finishes', and the only thing I can point to is the end of my funding even though that's not when it will actually finish! When I first started my PhD I didn't have a handle on this at all, and thought the goal was 80k words in three years - didn't realise all the end stages could drag on forever!

All the posters I've done have been for mixed audiences, and I've been advised to leave off things like references and footnotes, and just focus on making a good poster with a mix of images and text to get the message across.

One other consideration - if you have access to anyone who knows a bit about some of the personalities in your field, it might be worth asking them. For example, I have found out that of three main experts in my quals methodology, two are nice and one is a nightmare as an examiner :)

It is difficult! I've been advised to consider two things - getting someone who will value the quals stuff, and getting someone who will know a bit about the field. I think I would personally take a good look at the publications of any suggested names (not least because of the importance of citing them if relevant!), to make sure they don't seem to have any strong 'agenda' that would lead them to undermine my research. You might feel better after bringing it up with your supervisors, as there's a good chance they'll have started giving it some thought.

Sorry, realised after I posted the above that I had conflated 'multi-disciplinary' and 'mixed methodology' - my brain has been in meltdown for several days! But if there is one aspect of your thesis that might be understood less well by a non-expert, it may be best to choose an external based on that?

I've been talking to my supervisors about examiners but we haven't finalised anything yet. I have been told that certain internal people are 'off the table', but I haven't asked who! Regarding the external, as my work is also multi-disciplinary, we are going to focus on getting someone who will click with the qualitative parts of my thesis, as there's a risk that a purely quants person might dismiss it for being small-scale when it's actually the biggest part of the thesis.

I think if you are focusing on something that has happened, then it's certainly still valid to write about it. It may be that you have more material to discuss now . It is probably no bad thing to be writing about something that is actively evolving!

I've not even considered working yet today - far too distracted with the news! I must do something this afternoon though!