I don't completely understand the scoring system, but I suspect that
what happened is that enough other bids got two green lights that the
money could be distributed. The reviewers comments are just advice to
the funding body, but expert advice and usually given a lot of weight.
We could have played it better, I'm sure, and next time we will.
Chris
E.Vacchelli wrote:
> hi Chris,
>
> I was just wondering why didn't they ask for a third opinion on this?
> The decision sounds very arbitrary...
>
>
> All the best,
>
> Elena
>
> -----Messaggio originale-----
> Da: Participatory Video Network Discussion List per conto di Christopher High
> Inviato: dom 21/06/2009 23.38
> A: [log in to unmask]
> Oggetto: ESRC traning and networking bid
>
> My apologies - I've just remembered I didn't post anything to this list
> about the eventual fate of the bid I was working on earlier in the
> year. It's been a mad fortnight.
>
> Unfortunately the ESRC decided not to fund it in the end - one of the
> reviewers liked it and was very supportive, but the other wasn't.
>
> We're still talking about how we might do some of the things we'd sought
> funding for in other ways, and will post to the list if anything comes
> of it.
>
> Thanks for all your support.
>
> Chris High
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland (SC 038302).
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.374 / Virus Database: 270.12.85/2193 - Release Date: 06/21/09 20:02:00
>
>
|