While some schools let you know your relative tier (Michigan, Yale, etc.) , some insist that their WL is "unranked"... is it just me, or does anyone else feel that this is pure bullsh!t? I realize that some institutions like to find "similar" candidates to the one withdrawn, but how picky can they get? it seems completely inefficient and impractical to re-review each candidate every time a position opens up. it is my belief that the committees on schools that advertise "unranked" WL's actually have some sort of "tiering" or "ranking" of who they ACTUALLY consider for a position, and who they are just stringing along on the bottom of the batch. it absolutely sucks to have NO idea where you are on a 500-candidate waitlist, the least they could do is to let you know you have no shot and to get on with your life... that's what Michigan told me..effectively, by putting me on their bottom third- and i respect them for their honesty and straightforwardness. as for (cornell, MSSM, NYU, northwestern), it would benefit me more than a little to know where i am on their lists. did i mention im frustrated with my 7 waitlists?