trendlines

I have been a fan of http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/ for a couple of months now. Being numbers oriented, I have thoroughly appreciated the systematic analyses the authors perform on poll numbers. The quantitative sophistication and rigor are at a level rarely seen in political analysis reported to the general public.

So I was pretty taken aback by one of today's posts: In Oregon, Turnout is Down, But Especially in Red Counties. Here is the plot toward the bottom of the post:

Forget what the graph is plotting, what the heck is that line?? Nate Silver, who I normally greatly admire, goes on to very proudly explain:

"Note also that I have extended the regression line to predict the behavior of hypothetical counties consisting entirely of Bush voters, or entirely of Kerry voters. In [sic] regression line predicts that, in a county consisting of 100 percent Bush voters, turnout would be off by about 40 percent. Conversely, in a county consisting entirely of Kerry voters, it would be essentially unchanged."

Thanks Nate, for making what you did in 5 minutes in Microsoft Excel sound sophisticated. Thanks, too, for explaining to me how to read a line on a graph. However, the line you refer to nowhere mirrors the green dots. Fitting a line to that data is just plain wrong. Did you check the R^2 value of that fit, Nate?

My qualitative interpretation is that the fit for the data is a step function. Turnout change vs. 2004 is flat for all Bush Share of Votes under ~55%, after which there is a precipitous drop in turnout change. So the more interesting question to me is why there would be a threshold around 55%. I didn't need to hit the "Trendline" button in Excel to tell me that.

For the first time, I am disappointed in http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/.

thank yous

Proper etiquette deems that one send "Thank You's" to interviewers following an interview, right? Back in college, I mailed written notes, but I think it is okay these days to email interviewers (yikes, correct me if I'm wrong). The trouble with emails is the potential for a quick response, and it's always unnerving when the interviewer shoots back a formulaic response.

I didn't hear back yesterday about any decisions following Friday's interview. With the final round being this Thursday, I have to assume the worst. I just feel like they would give more notice than 2 days for a interview, so I think they probably called everyone who got one yesterday.

Rememebering nevertheless that I had forgotten to send to send my thank-yous to my two interviewers, I thought better late than never and shot off two emails this morning. I wrote short emails, with a sentence or two specific to each interview, and included at the end of each something positive and hopeful like "I hope I get the chance to talk with you again during Final Round interviews."

You don't ever expect to hear back from these "Thank you for interviewing me" emails, right? Unless I ask a specific question, right (and I didn't)?

Except the second interviewer, the one where I thought I did really well, already emailed me back:

Seine,
You're very welcome. I appreciate your kind words. It was great to meet you too.
Regards,
Nice Guy

Now I'm just spooked. I know it's a standard response, and I'm probably reading too much into it, but gosh, what a short email. Why even respond at all? Is his response deemed necessary by etiquette rules?

More than anything, his email just completely unnerved me. A lack of a phone call or a lack of a email response could mean anything (maybe they really just haven't gotten around to informing people of their decisions). But he must know whether or not I made it through, and there wasn't a single hint of positive in his email. It's better to not know than to get negative reinforcement.

Big sigh.

wrapping up the week

I now measure my weeks based on TV shows. I shouldn't have time to watch TV (there's always more work to be done), but I somehow always make time. It's made easier by bittorrent--I download the shows to my computer and watch whenever it is convenient for me. Still, it's a bit of a shocker that I have no picked up 7, yes seven, shows that I download and watch weekly. It just goes to show how much I suck in the self-control department.

So I now measure the "busyness" of my weeks by how many episodes of TV I have remaining, unwatched, on my computer by Sunday. This 1) reflects how much "free" time I had during the week, and 2) how many deadlines I actually had that I couldn't procrastinate through. This second point is important. Really, I never should be watching TV, but I always procrastinate work by watching a show (and then another and then another).

Two weeks ago, I was twiddling my thumbs on Thursday because I had no more shows left on my computer. By Thursday that week, I had spent 7 hours watching TV (well maybe a little less since the bittorrent files don't have commercials). That was a light week, or at least a week when a lot of things could be punted.

By comparison, this week, I still have 5 shows left to watch, and it's Saturday night. That gives you an idea what kind of week this one has been. No "free" time, and not even any time to procrastinate.

I did find a new hero (there's always time for web surfing, right?). His name is Ben Dorn, and he lives right here in Boston. I found him via YesWeCarve.com, and his pumpkin is here. The site is cute, and the people who send in their carved pumpkins are cute. But Ben Dorn beyond cute. Ben Dorn is my hero. Before Ben Dorn, I didn't even know shading was an option on pumpkins.

I have to admit that I did some facebook stalking of Ben Dorn. It seems that Ben is somewhat the Michael Phelps of pumpkin carving (isn't that comparison all the rage these days?) and a Red Sox Fan. Speaking of the Red Sox, they're winning Game 6, and it's bottom of the 8th.

In more productive news, my job interview took place Friday. I met with two people, back to back. The first interview was a bit shaky, definitely not stellar, but hopefully passable. The second one was super good, I thought, but then it's always hard to tell as the interviewee, isn't it?

At least this time, they won't make us wait long. The final round of interviews is next Thursday, so I should find out on Monday whether or not I made it. Keeping my fingers crossed on this one ... *sigh* if only the first interview had also gone swimmingly.

holidays

The trouble with grad school is that you forget about the holidays. The frat boys playing football on the field outside my window midday puzzled me. Don't they have class? The empty bike racks this morning should have been a sign, but I didn't realize it was a holiday until I went to get a sandwich at a campus eatery, only to find the eatery closed.

It wouldn't have made a difference even if I had remembered it being a holiday this morning. I would have still come to work. I guess that's the other trouble with grad school. There aren't real holidays and weekends.

I realized I never updated on the job application issue of last week. I didn't email HR, not wanting to be annoying. Wednesday morning, I decided to email an acquaintance to ask if she had heard anything back from the company. She very promptly replied that she also had not heard, and in fact, she didn't know anyone who had except one guy who knew a guy who got rejected. So, basically, a similar story to mine.

That email exchange actually completely calmed me. I stopped thinking about the silly job application and went on to do other things, instead of refreshing my Inbox every 5 minutes in hopes of seeing some kind of a response.

Friday morning, I got the email. I have an interview this Friday!

the waiting game

I submitted a resume and coverletter last Monday. It was a centralized recruiting process by a leading company, and there was one deadline for everyone who wanted to apply from my school, and first round interviews are next week. I haven't heard anything, either way, about making it to interviews.

Last night, I ran into a couple of people at another event, and we happened to talk about this company's application deadline. It's always awkward in such situations to inquire about the status of another student's job application. All too often, especially with the types of people at my school, situations get competitive, and people start safeguarding information. I don't see any need for that, and I am completely happy being as honest and straightforward as I can about my job application process, as long as I feel the other person would return the favor.

I feel that I usually do a good job diffusing the situation by offering information of my own first. "I haven't heard back from Company X, but I did hear back from Company Y, who rejected my application. No chance to interview." Usually, when I am this forthright, the other person lets down their guard and is more than happy to engage me in detailed conversation about their, and my, application processes.

With that said, I have been told that I should be more wary about sharing so much information, that sharing doesn't do anything for me, and could potentially hurt me if I tell the wrong people, presumably people who are sneaky. I'm not sure how much I should listen to that, but I guess I do run a mental judgment check of the person in front of me before I share information. There has to be rapport of some kind between us, and I have to have a generally positive feeling about that person. More often than not, the person isn't a complete stranger, but rather someone I've met before doing this or that around campus.

Anyway, back to the point, which was that I haven't heard back about this job I applied for, and I talked to a couple of people about it last night. Both conversations were one-on-one. The first person had not heard back, like me. The second person had heard, but it was a rejection--he would not get a chance to interview.

When I said that I had not heard anything either way, the latter person commented that I probably "have something in [my] email inbox waiting as we speak, because the company was supposed to have gotten back to us all by the end of Monday" (yesterday). That got me excited about going home and checking my email, but my hopes were quickly dashed when there was no such email in my Inbox.

I did get a confirmation last week that they had received my application submission, so I know they got my application. And the fact that somebody had heard, albeit in the negative, is indication that I should hear soon. So then not hearing something is good because no news is good news, right?

Except I still didn't hear anything tody. So now I am worried that perhaps my application wasn't filed in the right place, or somehow I didn't actually meet the deadline because I submitted at 6pm, which would have been after work hours, or a slew of other things that could have gone wrong that I can't even think of.

I've wanted to email the contact listed on the website to ask about my application. I've really restrained myself from doing so because I don't want to be annoying, a decision that Broadway agrees with. What if they're still sorting through applications and not yet finalized their decisions on everyone? My email would just be in the way. If I were the human resources person in that situation, I know I would roll my eyes at such an email.

So I'm not sure what to do, and I'm getting pretty anxious just waiting for an email in my inbox. Maybe I will wait until tomorrow morning, and if I still haven't heard, I will send something to HR.

it's friday!

Well, Friday started off on a bad note. Non-stop hard hard rain. Pour, pour, pour, and I debated this morning whether to actually don my rain gear to bike to work. I ultimately did, feeling confident and rather giddy at my tomboyishness to brave the forces of nature.

Biking along a major street (in the bike lane), a car coming out of an alleyway noses out in front of me, blocking the bike lane completely and sticking its head out past the lane into the actual roadway. The driver first looked away from me, for traffic oncoming from the other side of the road. Then he turned and looked straight at me. I saw him hesitate for a second, then decide to let up on his brakes, preparing to pull out in front of me.

At first, I hit my bike brakes because obviously I don't want to run into his car. Then in a moment of boldness, I am pissed off. Why should I avoid him?? He is the one turning into my path. I totally have the right of way going straight, and he should not be turning to cut me off just because I am a bike. I have every right to be on the road, and he needs to respect that. So I let up my brakes, pedal, and swerve around the front of his car.

As I am going by him, he gestures madly at me. I throw up my hands with a "What the fuck" face, and keep riding.

He turns, pulls up next to my bike, and rolls down his windows, starking mad. Before he has a chance to speak, I yell, still pedaling, "Dude, I have the right of way. I was going straight."

He counters with something about the fact that he "was stopped". I didn't catch everything he said, and what I caught made no sense at all. What? Because he's stopped, he has the right of way? I clearly had the right of way, going straight on my road. He was coming out of an alleyway, so it wasn't an intersection with rules for who goes first. He clearly did not have the right of way, wanting to turn on to my road. He needs to yield to traffic on the road, and that includes bike traffic traveling in the bike lane.

At this point, we had come to a red light. It was my intersection, so I ignored whatever else argument he was making, made a right turn to continue on my way to work.

The exchange made me so mad. I wanted to exact some kind of vigilante justice. I wanted to beat some sense into the guy: he would never have even thought to pull out in front of a car, and similarly, he has no right to pull out in front of me even if I am "just a bike".

And thus continues the saga of motorists & bikers in a supposedly bike-friendly city.

It's mid-afternoon now, and actually Friday's not turned out so bad. It is still gross out, raining nonstop all day. But a labmate I don't always get along with just went out of her way to tell me about an event happening tonight that I might be interested in. I did already know about it (and was debating going), but her genuineness inspired me to pretend that I didn't know and to show equally genuine appreciation that she would think to pass the information along.

the not-so-wondrous read

I'm reading the most popular Brief and Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao by Junot Diaz. It's been hyped and re-hyped, and I was so looking forward to it. However, I am finding it really hard to get into. At page 25, I thought it was just because I hadn't read enough. Now at page 100, I'm no more excited about the book than I was back at 25.

The book doesn't capture me, which in general would be fine, I think. Except in this case, I feel unusually self-conscious about the book's lack of charm on me. It makes me feel that perhaps somehow this is because I am culturally insensitive and ignorant.

I can't relate to Oscar and his family as much as I would like, or as much as I perceive someone who LOVES the book would. More than anything, I can't relate to Oscar the way I think a Carribbean would. The book reads fast, almost stream of consciousness kind of fast (though certainly not disjointed). But what bothers me are the short little phrases or observations or exclamations that the characters regularly blurt out in Spanish. They are barriers to me. I have no idea what they mean and certainly would have no shot at relating to them culturally. While they are seldom central to the plot of the book, I nonetheleses feel alienated.

My gut tells me that part of the critical acclaim for the book probably stems from the cultural richness of the book, but all of that is lost on me, which makes me feel like a bad bad person. Why is it that I am just plain uninterested in Carribbean culture? Am I somehow subconsciously racist? None of this is helped by the most recent election poll and somehow fearing that if I had taken that poll, I would have discovered an ugly subconscious in myself.

But, but, but, I argue with myself, I became engrossed with the plight of minorities and women in Afghanistan after reading Khaled Hosseini, and the issues in Northern Pakistan after reading Three Cups of Tea. I was fascinated by Kabul and even pondered the possibilities to travel to that part of the world (and pondered the hindrances I would face as a woman if I ever tried to attempt what Greg Mortenson did). Those stories moved me, regardless of the cultural and ethnicity of the characters. I am no more Afghan than I am Pakistani than I am Dominican.

So maybe I just don't particularly like Diaz's writing style?

He is doing a community reading of his book this week. I feel like I should go, if only to garner a deeper appreciation of the culture surrounding book, and maybe in person, he can verbally express the printed words in an affecting way for me.

I'm really not sure if I'll finish the book, which seems like such a shame. I am told that it is good.