Be careful, CFAI may fail you for applying too many times just for nonsense.
"The programming in the website that edits and updates scholarship applications may only be active for those who will be eligible to apply for a scholarship next year. So, if you failed, the mechanism which withdraws and updates an active application still works. If you passed, and won’t be eligible, the programming that updates the scholarship management portal is basically inactive at this point. "
@Schuilnaam - this logic is a bit convoluted. There is another link to scholarship. The candidates seeing 2 boxes, if they are assumed to belong to the pass group sho uld not be able to apply for scholarship from that link too. We do not have any such evidence now. Unless the 2 boxers can confirm that they are unable to apply for scholarship from the other link also, the hypothesis that the scholarship portal is locked for the ones passed cannot be confirmed as correct_._
mine says apply for membership too. Not sure what it was before
The way I look at this is, it can do one of two things for me, if I were to follow this -
-
It can give me false hope.
-
It can give me false despair.
Either result can be refuted when the true results come out. So, I rather not indulge in this.
Exactly.
…the devil is in the details though 
I used this link
https://www.cfainstitute.org/programs/cfaprogram/scholarships/Pages/index.aspx
Applied for scholarship. Just left it open.
Checked back on the Profile page - 2 box
I tried withdrawing - I get an error (Some one modified blah blah)
Checked back on the Profile page - 1 box.
.
Last year 2 boxes was pass -> https://www.analystforum.com/forums/cfa-forums/cfa-level-iii-forum/91353300 .
So if this year the more confident candidates have 2 boxes , than the bug is not fixed and this can be relevant tell.
Unfortunately, I am “1 boxer” 
.
Last year and this year “tells” are different. It seems like that last years two box was where 1 box said u could apply and the other box said u were uneligable to apply.
This year there is no uneligable box, instead there’s just no box. Possible that last years two box is this years one box?
same here
Well I’d rather believe that this year’s “box” is not at all a tell, at least for now. Last year’s “box tell” was only found to be valid the day before the result release. Plus there’s just no way that all the two-boxers with high confidence failed if all those one-boxers who, here and there, have claimed that they left 10~30 mins blank in AM part (no offense but I did see what some one-boxers wrote in the post-exam feeling post) passed. One or two two-boxers might be really unlucky but all of them have screwed up? Give me a reason to believe it.
Told my wife about this nonsense and she says “ya know, sometimes you have to wait til Santa clause puts your presents under the tree”.
P R E A C H
Hahaha, this is very true!
.
Maybe we have a lot of overconfidence bias?
Its hard to not want to expect the best which is what I did last year after failing L3 feeling confident walking out. This year, and with that experience in mind, I know it’s still a toss up and nothing is really 100% certain even if I feel confident about a certain question, a certain section, a certain topic, there is always room for error. Just my 0.02
I would venture to say there is more framing / confirmation bias going on than anything else. I don’t think any of this means anything.
Well I do understand people here, including me, are unconsciously trying to pull something out of the “box” that favors what we have. A two-boxer would of course like to see a theory saying that two instead of one means a pass while a one-boxer expects another. We can’t completely avoid the bias as we are human beings and conflicts of interest are involved.
Having said that, we can still try to be objective and judge the issue statistically. My observation is that the majority of the two-boxers said they felt confident about the exam with nothing left in AM part, including several well accepted top candidates here in this forum (@Flashback, for example), while I saw several one-boxers said they left 10~30 mins blank. If the candidates’ score bears Gaussian distribution, it’s really hard for me to believe that all these two-boxers fall in the left tail of “confident-with-AM-cleared group” and all these one-boxers go to the right tail of “have-not-finished-AM group”, not to mention that intuitively the former group would have a higher mean score than the latter.
I’m not saying the box absolutely means nothing though, since the sample is not large enough. But my best guess is still that it’s due to technical errors rather than a telling sign.
Hi bro,
maybe I’m doing something different but what if when I withdraw and NOT get this error message but when checking back it’s 1 box? What that may suggest?
Honestly folks now I really regret starting to read this page. Now instead of sudden death on 8/8, it now will be paiful and nervous 2weeks of waiting. Jeez! ((
…there is no harm in speculating as long as it does not affect your marbles…
As for me I bet all on the pass ! so should you until proven otherwise !