from Nodal Point of Thought 2021 Unexplored Jr. Don't fix what's wrong, but develop what's good.
Reply to a post about sharing rejected materials and discussing what was wrong with them.
nishio: It is good that more information is being disseminated, but from the standpoint of someone who is wondering "Proposal A and B are both very good, but what should I do?", after passing the first round of screening I wonder if it is possible to find bad points by looking at the proposal that failed in the first round by itself.
nishio: school exams and such are subtractive, so if you identify the mistakes and fix them, you get 100 points and pass, but something like unexplored junior is like "A is A is great! 150 points! But B is even better! 160 points! A is not selected, it's a waste of a great score, but it can't be helped...".
nishio: When you pass the screening process, you are already in the 100+ point zone where there are no "obvious flaws" and the rest is like a height comparison between multiple applications to see who is taller. It's like a comparison between multiple applications to see who is taller.
In connection with this and other related matters, the official website now includes "examples of accepted applications".
This page is auto-translated from /nishio/ダメなところを直すのではなく良いところを伸ばす using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I'm very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.